Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Map systems and player known locations

13567

Comments

  • AmatheAmathe Member LegendaryPosts: 7,630
    edited February 2016
    Anyone can make the "dumbed down hand holding"  argument. 

    Take any feature, and you can make it harder. And then harder still. Perhaps every time you die you should experience an hour's temporary blindness where your screen is black and no type of map, not even a mental one, will help you.

    Only an hour you say? My God go back to WoW. It should be 48 hours of temporary blindness. 

    What hand holding rubbish! Your character should be permanently blind and hobble through the game with a companion animal.

    An animal? That is literally hand holding. Go play a mainstream entertainment simulator.

    You get the idea. But here, where you are advocating for a limitation that is so restrictive it is not in Brad's last game, I think the "hand holding" hue and cry is completely misplaced. 

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

  • kikoodutroa8kikoodutroa8 Member RarePosts: 562
    I'd put the automap in the cashshop.
  • SinistSinist Member RarePosts: 1,369
    edited February 2016
    Amathe said:
    Anyone can make the "dumbed down hand holding"  argument. 

    Take any feature, and you can make it harder. And then harder still. Perhaps every time you die you should experience an hour's temporary blindness where your screen is black and no type of map, not even a mental one, will help you.

    Only an hour you say? My God go back to WoW. It should be 48 hours of temporary blindness. 

    What hand holding rubbish! Your character should be permanently blind and hobble through the game with a companion animal.

    An animal? That is literally hand holding. Go play a mainstream entertainment simulator.

    You get the idea. But here, where you are advocating for a limitation that is so restrictive it is not in Brad's last game, I think the "hand holding" hue and cry is completely misplaced. 
    The very definition of "newbie" is to create a dumbed down version of something in order to allow that "new person" to get acclimated to the game play before they make the experience "normal" play, so your argument has no grounds to the point I was making.

    You are making an argument of extremes to try and dismiss the validity of my point.

    As I said, the game should not be made less than normal to get someone used to the game. The game should be normal throughout its entirety. That means there should not be an "introduction" zone where players are hand held, led around, and given freebies just because they are new.

    As for the context of our discussion, it means that there should not be a special "newbie" map just because they are new. It is better to start a "new player" in a manner that is consistent to what they will experience throughout the game. A newbie zone or feature is placating to that "dumbed down" mentality. EQ didn't treat players like they were idiots at the start, It would be bad form for Pantheon to do so, it sends the wrong message.


  • Raidan_EQRaidan_EQ Member UncommonPosts: 247
    edited February 2016
    Amathe said:
    I will keep looking. Thanks. Guess we will see what happens. 
    Amathe,

    The comment that Sinist linked from me was from a much earlier discussion - much could have changed since then.  The topic came about when the first pre-alpha build for Pantheon (first videos) showed a mini-map in game with the "your are here" flashing blinker on the mini-map and it was met with a large amount of backlash from the community and the mini-map was removed from the next gameplay videos.

    There's been no recent info on the use of in game maps, but there was discussion fairly recently on having no mini-maps - unfortunately, I can't find a link.

    With that said, I still stand by my comment of preferring no innate in game map, but I'd be for a creative cartography skill, or mob dropped maps that were rudimentiary and you had to know the orc language and the lore of what they called their landmarks to decipher it.  Perhaps their maps were even wrong - Orc warrior versus shaman drawing it? Right clickable maps versus having a persistent one.
    Post edited by Raidan_EQ on
  • SinistSinist Member RarePosts: 1,369
    edited February 2016
    I can deal either way but it seems funny that people are all about immersion and a certain aspect of realism in these games. Yet it seems ridiculous for a world that has kingdoms, written scroll of magic and societies to not have something basic like maps or a way to obtain them. Also if this was already decided by the dev's then why start a discussion about it... to argue with and talk down to people? 
    My OP was more specifically about the location system. There were no maps in release EQ, but there was still a coordinate system. This allowed people to make maps and specify exact locations, for instance as below:



    I suggested not even allowing for players to use a coordinate system so maps are entirely based on general association, not pin point location.

    This is what my OP stated:

    I was thinking about this, and my advice to VR is no tangible assets as it concerns being able to discern ones location in the game.   That is... ZERO indicators... No maps, no command lines to discern x, y, z, axis... nothing. Make people learn via landmark. Make people  know locations by relative nature. Make them say "Hey, we are over by the old statue of Tunare... not "We are over at 570 x 390 y". People want immersion, then give it to them, not this "easy mode".


    So, the discussion was centered around that, not if they would be putting in maps or not. The map discussion was not my derailment, rather it was what others just wanted to discuss, so I obliged.

    As for "talking down" to people? Where am I talking down to people or are you just being overly sensitive?
  • renatodiasrenatodias Member UncommonPosts: 12
         Just think that taking time from other aspects of the game to do an overthought map mechanism it is not a very good thing right now. If you had to choose which aspect of the game to put your "hardcore" chips on it , i would say map is not nearly enough of a priority.

          After all the discussion here , i would still vote for a crude map , with no player indicator nor coordinates on anything.
  • SinistSinist Member RarePosts: 1,369
    Sinist said:
    I can deal either way but it seems funny that people are all about immersion and a certain aspect of realism in these games. Yet it seems ridiculous for a world that has kingdoms, written scroll of magic and societies to not have something basic like maps or a way to obtain them. Also if this was already decided by the dev's then why start a discussion about it... to argue with and talk down to people? 
    My OP was more specifically about the location system. There were no maps in release EQ, but there was still a coordinate system. This allowed people to make maps and specify exact locations, for instance as below:



    I suggested not even allowing for players to use a coordinate system so maps are entirely based on general association, not pin point location.

    This is what my OP stated:

    I was thinking about this, and my advice to VR is no tangible assets as it concerns being able to discern ones location in the game.   That is... ZERO indicators... No maps, no command lines to discern x, y, z, axis... nothing. Make people learn via landmark. Make people  know locations by relative nature. Make them say "Hey, we are over by the old statue of Tunare... not "We are over at 570 x 390 y". People want immersion, then give it to them, not this "easy mode".


    So, the discussion was centered around that, not if they would be putting in maps or not. The map discussion was not my derailment, rather it was what others just wanted to discuss, so I obliged.

    As for "talking down" to people? Where am I talking down to people or are you just being overly sensitive?
    No, forget it you just keep goin. You will just tell me something like "I didn't name someone specifically" or something. Still like I said it's very non immersive to me to not have maps even if basic or earned. I mean you have a kingdom with roads villages and it's not mapped?
    They have lived there for who knows how long and there isn't a basic map you can obtain of the surrounding area? Very immersion breaking.

    Yeah, I will use facts and logic and all that garbage stuff that gets in the way of a good old fashion false summary! Or maybe you think it is impolite to correct someone who makes an illogical argument? I mean, maybe we should all hug and share our feelings? Maybe have a good cry as well? /boggle

    So do you have a problem with seeing a moving icon on your map? How about a mini-map? How do those fit into your whole "immersion" point?

  • Gyva02Gyva02 Member RarePosts: 499
    Completely agree, no maps and no cords. No toggles, everyone gets to learn the world and not race past it. But maybe I'm biased as I have excellent sense of direction, or wait wait wait I'll call it game skills. ha ha.. 

    I don't need no stinkin map... 

    But if you do, I'll guide you there for a few gold pieces :) 

  • SinistSinist Member RarePosts: 1,369
    Sinist said:
    Sinist said:
    I can deal either way but it seems funny that people are all about immersion and a certain aspect of realism in these games. Yet it seems ridiculous for a world that has kingdoms, written scroll of magic and societies to not have something basic like maps or a way to obtain them. Also if this was already decided by the dev's then why start a discussion about it... to argue with and talk down to people? 
    My OP was more specifically about the location system. There were no maps in release EQ, but there was still a coordinate system. This allowed people to make maps and specify exact locations, for instance as below:



    I suggested not even allowing for players to use a coordinate system so maps are entirely based on general association, not pin point location.

    This is what my OP stated:

    I was thinking about this, and my advice to VR is no tangible assets as it concerns being able to discern ones location in the game.   That is... ZERO indicators... No maps, no command lines to discern x, y, z, axis... nothing. Make people learn via landmark. Make people  know locations by relative nature. Make them say "Hey, we are over by the old statue of Tunare... not "We are over at 570 x 390 y". People want immersion, then give it to them, not this "easy mode".


    So, the discussion was centered around that, not if they would be putting in maps or not. The map discussion was not my derailment, rather it was what others just wanted to discuss, so I obliged.

    As for "talking down" to people? Where am I talking down to people or are you just being overly sensitive?
    No, forget it you just keep goin. You will just tell me something like "I didn't name someone specifically" or something. Still like I said it's very non immersive to me to not have maps even if basic or earned. I mean you have a kingdom with roads villages and it's not mapped?
    They have lived there for who knows how long and there isn't a basic map you can obtain of the surrounding area? Very immersion breaking.

    Yeah, I will use facts and logic and all that garbage stuff that gets in the way of a good old fashion false summary! Or maybe you think it is impolite to correct someone who makes an illogical argument? I mean, maybe we should all hug and share our feelings? Maybe have a good cry as well? /boggle

    So do you have a problem with seeing a moving icon on your map? How about a mini-map? How do those fit into your whole "immersion" point?

    Right , right. whatever you say. I never said you had to have those things just a basic map. Assume a lot don't we.
    I did not make an assumption, I asked you a question of how you felt about those things. /facepalm
  • DullahanDullahan Member EpicPosts: 4,534
    edited February 2016
    I have no problem with general maps with a few landmarks. I don't want to see maps that are a perfect aerial 3d view of a zone with grid lines. I especially wouldn't want a marker showing your location and heading.

    Its been confirmed no mini-maps in Pantheon. I believe they've said nothing that indicates current location. As to maps as a whole, I think they intend to have them in some form.

    My personal preference is a cartography skill. I actually came up with a pretty detailed system a while back. With cartography profession and utensils, you could map out a small area around you in very poor detail. Through the use of the skill, you gain the ability to map out a larger area with each use of the skill, and with more details. These maps could be sold and bound into a player's map book. The cartographer should either only be able to make a limited number of copies, or not be able to copy his maps at all. Skilling up should require mapping harder areas so players don't just remap a newbie zone all the way to max.

    Either way, I think maps shouldn't completely trivialize travel and exploration. It should be something that can give you a basic overview of an area, but still require the player to learn the specific details and dangers in any given place.


  • SinistSinist Member RarePosts: 1,369
    edited February 2016
    Pleasure talking to you.
    We were talking? Seemed as if you were acting offended and making accusations and I was correcting you. Didn't seem like we were talking at all. If you call that talking, please save us the trouble and don't bother "talking" to me.

    Good day!
  • Nightbringe1Nightbringe1 Member UncommonPosts: 1,335
    I enjoyed the early days of EQ, where sense heading was an important skill and players took the time to learn their way around zones. The days where you conveyed your location by camp names, not grid coordinates or an arrow on a HUD.

    Any fool can criticize, condemn and complain and most fools do.
    Benjamin Franklin

  • AmatheAmathe Member LegendaryPosts: 7,630
    Gyva02 said:

    Completely agree, no maps and no cords. No toggles, everyone gets to learn the world and not race past it. 
    And no dumbed down  EZ mode NPCs and the game interface being in English. It should be in Navajo. 

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

  • MaurgrimMaurgrim Member RarePosts: 1,295
    Sound nice on paper but dont really work as intended, people will make maps on wikis and other sources sure you cant see yourself ingame where you are but with maps at your desk is not that hard to navigate.
  • SinistSinist Member RarePosts: 1,369
    edited February 2016
    Amathe said:
    Gyva02 said:

    Completely agree, no maps and no cords. No toggles, everyone gets to learn the world and not race past it. 
    And no dumbed down  EZ mode NPCs and the game interface being in English. It should be in Navajo. 
    What is with the argument of extremes? Seriously, if you can't have a dumbed down map telling you where everything is or if you actually have to put in time to learn an area, it is extreme?
     
    It is like gaming is lost on people. The whole idea of exploration, learning, and overcoming obstacles are such a hassle for people it seems. No wonder games today are just pointless glorified chat rooms, I mean.. we wouldn't want to ask people to have to do anything, that might get in the way of their fun! /derp /derp

  • SinistSinist Member RarePosts: 1,369
    Maurgrim said:
    Sound nice on paper but dont really work as intended, people will make maps on wikis and other sources sure you cant see yourself ingame where you are but with maps at your desk is not that hard to navigate.
    Nothing wrong with that. It still takes effort and it isn't an easy hand out. You still don't know exactly where things are, or how close you are to something, etc... You still have to learn landmarks in the game to be able to tell where you are.


    Maps in games today are cheats, not game play elements.


  • Gyva02Gyva02 Member RarePosts: 499
    Sinist said:
    Amathe said:
    Gyva02 said:

    Completely agree, no maps and no cords. No toggles, everyone gets to learn the world and not race past it. 
    And no dumbed down  EZ mode NPCs and the game interface being in English. It should be in Navajo. 
    What is with the argument of extremes? Seriously, if you can't have a dumbed down map telling you where everything is or if you actually have to put in time to learn an area, it is extreme?
     
    It is like gaming is lost on people. The whole idea of exploration, learning, and overcoming obstacles are such a hassle for people it seems. No wonder games today are just pointless glorified chat rooms, I mean.. we wouldn't want to ask people to have to do anything, that might get in the way of their fun! /derp /derp

    Everyone's hooked on easy street and are scared to death of a little challenge... 
  • Gyva02Gyva02 Member RarePosts: 499
    edited February 2016
    Amathe said:
    Gyva02 said:

    Completely agree, no maps and no cords. No toggles, everyone gets to learn the world and not race past it. 
    And no dumbed down  EZ mode NPCs and the game interface being in English. It should be in Navajo. 
    So when people are out and about exploring the country side, maybe exploring a cave, out in the woods or something, everything suddenly starts communicating in Navajo except for the explorer???? I want some of those mushrooms...    
    Post edited by Gyva02 on
  • SinistSinist Member RarePosts: 1,369
    Gyva02 said:
    Everyone's hooked on easy street and are scared to death of a little challenge... 
    This goes back to my argument of the difference between the person who wants to play a game and one who just wants to be entertained. The gamer desires elements of play that create obstacles to be overcome while the person who just wants to be entertained simply desires convenience in their play.

  • AmatheAmathe Member LegendaryPosts: 7,630
    What I hear you saying is that if you propose some pointless difficulty, that is pure gold. But if I propose one, it is delusional mockery. Are you afraid to learn a new language? A real, challenging language instead of just sitting and spamming orc or fairy as a simulation? Sounds like you don't want to play a game and just want to read your EZ-mode English and be entertained. Perhaps you are not as good at languages as I am and are afraid to compete? Perhaps you are afraid I will have an advantage over you that is unwarranted? Hmmmmm. 

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

  • MendelMendel Member EpicPosts: 4,778
    Sinist said:
    The only way this works is if EVERYONE is forced to it. If you make it optional, there is no point. Few if any will play a game purposefully handicapped when others are not required (unless it is a server rule set). Either you require everyone, or do not bother.

    Either people are interested in playing a game, or they are interested in being "entertained". There is a distinct difference in expectations.
    Since the word handicapped has crept into this discussion, let me reverse the question.  Why would any developers create a game with handicapped functionality?  Are people somehow offended when a building entrance includes both steps and a ramp?  Is there social hostility about something trying to include different preferences rather than exclusionary that I haven't seen?

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

  • SinistSinist Member RarePosts: 1,369
    Amathe said:
    What I hear you saying is that if you propose some pointless difficulty, that is pure gold. But if I propose one, it is delusional mockery. Are you afraid to learn a new language? A real, challenging language instead of just sitting and spamming orc or fairy as a simulation? Sounds like you don't want to play a game and just want to read your EZ-mode English and be entertained. Perhaps you are not as good at languages as I am and are afraid to compete? Perhaps you are afraid I will have an advantage over you that is unwarranted? Hmmmmm. 

    You are seriously comparing asking a person to learn the zone they are exploring in with having someone learn an entire language just to converse with an NPC? Again, argument of extremes. Your position is nowhere near reasonable. All you are doing is making extreme arguments in rebuttal because you are upset that you can't deal with the fact you are being unreasonable.


  • AmsaiAmsai Member UncommonPosts: 299
    Sinist said:
    Gyva02 said:
    Everyone's hooked on easy street and are scared to death of a little challenge... 
    This goes back to my argument of the difference between the person who wants to play a game and one who just wants to be entertained. The gamer desires elements of play that create obstacles to be overcome while the person who just wants to be entertained simply desires convenience in their play.

    I have to ask. What makes you the authority? Im not necessarily disagreeing with you. But isnt this all a matter of opinion and personal tastes? Who gives a shit what others play or if they want entertainment or challenge? I dont. I do what I do and others do what they do. Also I think different people like different types or different levels of challenge as well. Some of us like ridiculous challenge, others want to sale through a game like it was an interactive book/movie. I dont think their is a right or wrong here, but your tone implies there is, even if you didnt mean it that way. Im sure we could find some type of challenge that could be proposed into Pantheon that you would write 10,000 posts arguing against it. Everyones taste varies. Saying that because they dont want one specific aspect to be challenging doesnt mean they want everything handed to them either. You do realize that right? Or was Driven right in that the purpose of this topic (a topic the Devs have already sounded off on) to troll?

    What if before every battle big or small you had to solve a random calculus equation? Thats challenging right?


  • SinistSinist Member RarePosts: 1,369
    edited February 2016
    Mendel said:
    Sinist said:
    The only way this works is if EVERYONE is forced to it. If you make it optional, there is no point. Few if any will play a game purposefully handicapped when others are not required (unless it is a server rule set). Either you require everyone, or do not bother.

    Either people are interested in playing a game, or they are interested in being "entertained". There is a distinct difference in expectations.
    Since the word handicapped has crept into this discussion, let me reverse the question.  Why would any developers create a game with handicapped functionality?  Are people somehow offended when a building entrance includes both steps and a ramp?  Is there social hostility about something trying to include different preferences rather than exclusionary that I haven't seen?
    Why don't they let handicaps play in the NFL? or the NBA? Those evil people for not allowing such a person to compete with the others(of course with numerous bonuses and benefits over the the normal players, you know.. to even it out!)? How terrible they are that they have games out there that does not consider those who can't (or in the case of many so called people in games WILL NOT) put the effort into the game? Why how terrible they are, how mean and cruel they are for not allowing a wheel chair defensive line backer!

    Woe is me, the world is so unfair!!! Social Justice Warriors unite! Form of Narcissist!

  • SinistSinist Member RarePosts: 1,369
    edited February 2016
    Amsai said:
    Sinist said:
    Gyva02 said:
    Everyone's hooked on easy street and are scared to death of a little challenge... 
    This goes back to my argument of the difference between the person who wants to play a game and one who just wants to be entertained. The gamer desires elements of play that create obstacles to be overcome while the person who just wants to be entertained simply desires convenience in their play.

    I have to ask. What makes you the authority? Im not necessarily disagreeing with you. But isnt this all a matter of opinion and personal tastes? Who gives a shit what others play or if they want entertainment or challenge? I dont. I do what I do and others do what they do. Also I think different people like different types or different levels of challenge as well. Some of us like ridiculous challenge, others want to sale through a game like it was an interactive book/movie. I dont think their is a right or wrong here, but your tone implies there is, even if you didnt mean it that way. Im sure we could find some type of challenge that could be proposed into Pantheon that you would write 10,000 posts arguing against it. Everyones taste varies. Saying that because they dont want one specific aspect to be challenging doesnt mean they want everything handed to them either. You do realize that right? Or was Driven right in that the purpose of this topic (a topic the Devs have already sounded off on) to troll?

    What if before every battle big or small you had to solve a random calculus equation? Thats challenging right?
    Do you really want an honest answer? If I go into all the details between subjective/objective, valid/invalid, sound/unsound logic, etc... are you going to consider it or just dismiss it? This is an honest question as if you are going to dismiss, I don't see the point in bothering to answer here.

    So, honestly, do you really want an honest answer?

    edit:

    By the way, that means answering like DrivenDawn has answered and considering you and he are pretty much joined at the hip in opinion, I have no interest in wasting time explaining my position to someone who won't read it and will simply brush it away as if it was never even mentioned. I have no respect for people as such, none.
Sign In or Register to comment.