KickStarter Pantheon - (Brad "EQ" McQuaid's new MMO)

[Aenra]

Bullshit..i could say the same for you. Sometimes you don't understand me, sometimes i trigger you and you sure as hell occasionally get too emotional. So what..?..
It's not about 'them'. It's about you. You want to play AND got the time, you put the effort in. Push your agenda. You never do anything and complain after the fact.. too late. You think gamers aren't like you, try being me for a day, lol

It's still the environment you'll find yourself in. Regardless of the above

(as for mmorpg.com .. your fault for that in specific. 4chan is Stanford Alumni compared to mmorpg.com, lol, what did you expect man)
Stop being a pussy and make an account. I need people to bitch with. The resident retards there cannot into arguing with me, they switch to monosyllabic and pikturez

 

[Xenich]

I don't get emotional, I get insulting but usually that is due to someone else provoking it. Usually what sets me off is when I think someone is trying to be devious in their arguments, or... they are purposefully being dense in hopes of winning some point in an argument.

It won't do any good for me to be there. Heck, you and I are at odds on game features most of the time as is apparent from the many arguments here. Not to mention, due to our bluntness, some little girl-boy is going to get upset and start spamming the report button. Besides, honestly... I don't like arguing anyway, I like to discuss the features and various ideas. Look on MMORPG on my threads I started, I usually don't get in a fight until some idiot comes in trying to derail the discussion with their antics.

Most of the people in the Pantheon forums don't want a game. While some do share many features that I like, they ultimately are just mainstreamers (ie people who want entertainment, not a game). That became extremely obvious when they defended player trade as they did in the face of ANY adjustment.

I brought up multiple topics on MMORPG and most of them just didn't get it. I have read the forums on the Pantheon site and they really are the same shallow arguments. Many of the original posters from early on don't even respond much anymore. Most are just WoWtards going on about how they think the game should be yet another WoW clone. I have seen that pattern for over a decade, not really interested in getting into it again (I wanted to strangle the idiots who destroyed LoTRO, such a disappointment and that was all brought to you buy the WoW crowd back then).

Anyway, like I said... I will wait till release, watch from afar and see how it turns out. At this point, my hopes are riding more on VRs team (Chris Rowan and the developers) as Brad gets a little too mainstream for my tastes (funny as that may sound and the team has fought him on some topics successfully (ie Brad wanted fast travel to all the city hubs and they got him to change that). If they produce the game that I have seen them talk about, I "may" enjoy it. If the game gets made based on the average of opinions in the Pantheon forum? Yeah... I may take up a new hobby. /shrug

 

[Aenra]

We don't disagree you moron^^ the things you want, i want. It's just that you're satisfied with those and those alone, whereas i want more; secondary, tertiary, QoL features. Extra. When i'm not pewpewing. Some you just think of as "mainstream" and get triggered, but that's bad implementation. They can just as easily be made to suport the central features
Fucking months later and you still don't get it, lol..

Anyway, we'll see. You're not far off with 'the new hobby'.. way this is going, i don't see anything else coming. If neither Pantheon nor (for me) PG or SotA amount to anything.. yeah. Time to unearth those golf clubs i was gifted, lol

 

[Xenich]

We don't disagree you moron^^ the things you want, i want. It's just that you're satisfied with those and those alone, whereas i want more; secondary, tertiary, QoL features. Extra. When i'm not pewpewing. Some you just think of as "mainstream" and get triggered, but that's bad implementation. They can just as easily be made to suport the central features
Fucking months later and you still don't get it, lol..

Anyway, we'll see. You're not far off with 'the new hobby'.. way this is going, i don't see anything else coming. If neither Pantheon nor (for me) PG or SotA amount to anything.. yeah. Time to unearth those golf clubs i was gifted, lol

Ok, I just looked over this thread again, I guess I was mixing you up with Belowmecoldhands who kept claiming he liked old school, but then kept arguing for mainstream features (fast travel, auto-map, etc...), which I thought was odd considering he kept touting Wurm Online.

Our objections were mainly over a bunch of crap that wasn't specifically an old school vs mainstream issue, more of a implementation one. Your appearance slot argument though I disagree with as I think it is should be game play, not convenience.

 

[Aenra]

......

[can't fucking believe you'd confuse me with belowmecoldhands, lol.. i mean for real..?]
[[no offense belowme, but i dare think you'd agree we're night and day]]

 

[Xenich]

......

[can't fucking believe you'd confuse me with belowmecoldhands, lol.. i mean for real..?]
[[no offense belowme, but i dare think you'd agree we're night and day]]

Well, both of you were arguing with me quite heavily for a while. Him promoting mainstream design, you picking at me because you thought I was being a fan boy or because of the instancing thing.

Regardless, I confused two shits bitching at me... /smirk

 

[belowmecoldhands]

Ok, I just looked over this thread again, I guess I was mixing you up with Belowmecoldhands who kept claiming he liked old school, but then kept arguing for mainstream features (fast travel, auto-map, etc...), which I thought was odd considering he kept touting Wurm Online.

Our objections were mainly over a bunch of crap that wasn't specifically an old school vs mainstream issue, more of a implementation one. Your appearance slot argument though I disagree with as I think it is should be game play, not convenience.

Sorry for confusing you. I never have said I like auto-maps. I did say I liked the fast travle in UO. But this is like mixing apples and oranges. EQ and UO are different games. Please don't speak for me.

This is what I said:
http://www.rpgcodex.net/forums/inde...q-mcquaids-new-mmo.89078/page-13#post-3863022
One of my first posts to the thread (almost a year ago):
http://www.rpgcodex.net/forums/inde...eq-mcquaids-new-mmo.89078/page-6#post-3795285

I said Pantheon can try to be old school, but I think it'd be a bad decision commercially--if it's commercial. Old school just isn't popular and many of the old school players are entrenched in old MMO's and emulators. I was playing old MMO's and emulators for years. I still play MUDs. And you can do this for free. A new old school MMO has to be damn good even to just get 1000 active players. And I remember Brad a few years ago saying they'd get ~75,000. I didn't believe it.

It's brutal out there Xenich. BRUTAL! I don't want Pantheon to fail. That's why I argued it should be have some mainstream features. I myself do not like mainstream features and somehow you haven't understood that. I care more about Pantheon than my own interests. I will say again: I'll play it no matter what it does.

 

[belowmecoldhands]

Have you looked at Saga of Lucimia? It's another embryonic MMO I'm watching. They'll probably crash adn burn, but they also want to be "challenging" and group-oriented and essentially old school. And no PvP server:
https://sagaoflucimia.com/

I bet you'll find something to hate about it. Angry you're. Were you born angry.

 

[Xenich]

Ok, I just looked over this thread again, I guess I was mixing you up with Belowmecoldhands who kept claiming he liked old school, but then kept arguing for mainstream features (fast travel, auto-map, etc...), which I thought was odd considering he kept touting Wurm Online.

Our objections were mainly over a bunch of crap that wasn't specifically an old school vs mainstream issue, more of a implementation one. Your appearance slot argument though I disagree with as I think it is should be game play, not convenience.

Sorry for confusing you. I never have said I like auto-maps. I did say I liked the fast travle in UO. But this is like mixing apples and oranges. EQ and UO are different games. Please don't speak for me.

This is what I said:
http://www.rpgcodex.net/forums/inde...q-mcquaids-new-mmo.89078/page-13#post-3863022
One of my first posts to the thread (almost a year ago):
http://www.rpgcodex.net/forums/inde...eq-mcquaids-new-mmo.89078/page-6#post-3795285

I said Pantheon can try to be old school, but I think it'd be a bad decision commercially--if it's commercial. Old school just isn't popular and many of the old school players are entrenched in old MMO's and emulators. I was playing old MMO's and emulators for years. I still play MUDs. And you can do this for free. A new old school MMO has to be damn good even to just get 1000 active players. And I remember Brad a few years ago saying they'd get ~75,000. I didn't believe it.

It's brutal out there Xenich. BRUTAL! I don't want Pantheon to fail. That's why I argued it should be have some mainstream features. I myself do not like mainstream features and somehow you haven't understood that. I care more about Pantheon than my own interests. I will say again: I'll play it no matter what it does.

I am aware of your arguments. They are illogical and counter the entire point of the game in the first place.

If you put mainstream into Pantheon, it will defeat the point of Pantheon and there by ensuring only mainstreamers will play it. Knowing how mainstream players are, that means the game will have to become yet another mainstream gimmick to stay afloat.

What you don't understand is that mainstream is completely counter to what a game is. MMOs today are not games, they are just entertainment simulators for people who are bored which is why every mainstream feature is actually a removal of game play (ie maps so people don't have to explore, no death penalties so there is no risk/reward, etc....).So when you say they need to put in mainstream features, what you are saying is they need to remove game play elements. You said you will play the game either way... I won't. They make mainstream, I won't bother which is why I haven't spent a dime on the game and won't until the show their results. I have "been there" and "done that" far too many times to be fooled again.

I am not going to argue over "what ifs", but I will say the numbers of players who want a real game again are there and enough to support a game like Pantheon. Pantheon success is dependent on not compromising with mainstream. Like I said, if they compromise, I won't touch the game. I would be an idiot to play a game knowing that it will eventually sell out and become full mainstream. Mainstream players are never happy with a compromise, they will consume the game and if VR is willing to sell out (as they have already said they are not catering to mainstream), then the will sell the game out completely and it won't last that long if they do.

 

[Xenich]

Have you looked at Saga of Lucimia? It's another embryonic MMO I'm watching. They'll probably crash adn burn, but they also want to be "challenging" and group-oriented and essentially old school. And no PvP server:
https://sagaoflucimia.com/

I bet you'll find something to hate about it. Angry you're. Were you born angry.

Oh, you mean if I don't like it, then it is a deficiency on my part... you know.... because I am angry and all?

You are stupid, were you born stupid? /boggle

 

[belowmecoldhands]

I am aware of your arguments. They are illogical and counter the entire point of the game in the first place.

If you put mainstream into Pantheon, it will defeat the point of Pantheon and there by ensuring only mainstreamers will play it. Knowing how mainstream players are, that means the game will have to become yet another mainstream gimmick to stay afloat.

What you don't understand is that mainstream is completely counter to what a game is. MMOs today are not games, they are just entertainment simulators for people who are bored which is why every mainstream feature is actually a removal of game play (ie maps so people don't have to explore, no death penalties so there is no risk/reward, etc....).So when you say they need to put in mainstream features, what you are saying is they need to remove game play elements. You said you will play the game either way... I won't. They make mainstream, I won't bother which is why I haven't spent a dime on the game and won't until the show their results. I have "been there" and "done that" far too many times to be fooled again.

I am not going to argue over "what ifs", but I will say the numbers of players who want a real game again are there and enough to support a game like Pantheon. Pantheon success is dependent on not compromising with mainstream. Like I said, if they compromise, I won't touch the game. I would be an idiot to play a game knowing that it will eventually sell out and become full mainstream. Mainstream players are never happy with a compromise, they will consume the game and if VR is willing to sell out (as they have already said they are not catering to mainstream), then the will sell the game out completely and it won't last that long if they do.

It's just amusing to no end I agree with almost everything you say but one reason or another you don't like me. It's like I got a disease or infection or I'm racist and you're afraid some of it will spread onto you. I'm convinced someday I'll make you like me. Not yet. But you don't know how determined I can be, when I put my mind to it.

I'll try summing it up again. I currently feel it's very difficult for a new MMO to succeed, even if it has Brad's name on it or otherwise somebody or something well liked or favored is attached to it. You know even WoW clones are failling! Because players today are entrenched in old MMO's, emulators and MUDs even. And it's hard to execute. It's hard to find talent. It's hard to find the money. It's a gamble to make an MMO and it's a miracle to make more than you put in. For that reason and because I like Brad due to my long years playing EQ and watching Vanguard--and the fact he has a daughter and is middle age--causes me to hope Pantheon has some mainstream features just to add some cushion against the hailstorm of obstacles.

I don't like mainstream, regardless of your insinuations and I never have said I like it. Look at my posts. I did say I'm not inflexible, but I never said I like it. It has always and will always be about Pantheon for me and its solvency. I've seen too many MMO's die. Maybe I'm a coward for being this way. Maybe you're right being the way you're.

 

[belowmecoldhands]

Have you looked at Saga of Lucimia? It's another embryonic MMO I'm watching. They'll probably crash adn burn, but they also want to be "challenging" and group-oriented and essentially old school. And no PvP server:
https://sagaoflucimia.com/

I bet you'll find something to hate about it. Angry you're. Were you born angry.

Oh, you mean if I don't like it, then it is a deficiency on my part... you know.... because I am angry and all?

You are stupid, were you born stupid? /boggle

No. It's music. To relax. I'm not patronizing. Maybe I was posting it as much for myself because I get angry too. You know in a world of emotions, some of them not good ones, we need vacations. And somebody in the MMORPG forums posted the link because they thought it was EQ-ish. I posted it because I thought they were half-right.

That music is too soft or moody. It reminded me more of Natimbi:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=93g64jFeEJw

On the face of it I can't discriminate whether it's a sad song or a happy song.

This however is everquest, not soft at all, but just lightweight
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FU1Fz9LWFtg

Even in the long and dangerous planes of Karana it's not soft like Natimbi:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vEbwoo3lLwQ

What of the small places in Karana where settlers braved its dangers? Soft? Nope:

 

[Xenich]

You know even WoW clones are failling! Because players today are entrenched in old MMO's, emulators and MUDs even.

WoW's model is for the most part a horrible one. Its quest designs, its focus, its play style was successful because of its timing and the added audience. Sony was pissing on its player base at the time, EQ2 was a joke and WoW was the only thing that was a viable alternative at the time. Even then, WoW quickly degraded itself and its largest success is not that of being a game, but being a non-gamer chat room hangout for people who don't like games. Then there is also the fact that even the games that attempt to mimic it, only mimic its later incarnations, not its original design.

And it's hard to execute. It's hard to find talent. It's hard to find the money. It's a gamble to make an MMO and it's a miracle to make more than you put in.

To make a mainstream MMO yes... where you design one with all the flash, the frills, voice acting and basically all the crap that has nothing to do with game play and everything to do with marketing a fad and yes... it is as you say. Notice that they are spending nowhere near that with Pantheon. Also note they aren't even making their own engine. Pantheon is ridiculously cheap compared to that, in fact... it isn't even close to the expense of EQ which was around 8 million. The biggest expense for them is content making and art.

For that reason and because I like Brad due to my long years playing EQ and watching Vanguard--and the fact he has a daughter and is middle age--causes me to hope Pantheon has some mainstream features just to add some cushion against the hailstorm of obstacles.

If Brad markets to mainstream at all, it will kill his game. Sure, as I said.. it may be a success for a while, but then it will be just one more piece of crap in a market full of crap. You can't cater to the kids today. EQ was not made for the kids, it was not catered to mainstream. It was focused for gamers. Mainstream as I said is not gaming, it is features on how to cheat game play.

I don't like mainstream, regardless of your insinuations and I never have said I like it. Look at my posts. I did say I'm not inflexible, but I never said I like it. It has always and will always be about Pantheon for me and its solvency. I've seen too many MMO's die. Maybe I'm a coward for being this way. Maybe you're right being the way you're.

You tolerate it, that makes you just as bad as those who seek it. It is like that video "EA in a Nutshell". You keep buying the shit, but acting as if you aren't part of that crowd, then here you are asking for mainstream features in a game after watching game after game cave because of mainstream features. You are the hesitant straggler who keeps going back for more.

 

[Alchemist]

I haven't been following Pantheon developments lately (or this thread) but I'm looking forward to the live stream today to see what they've got. It's not til 4:00 PM Pst, but people are already chatting in there.

And I'm with Xenich regarding keeping it not mainstream. That would defeat their whole purpose. Project Gorgon has sort of proved you can make a niche MMO and have enough audience to fund it. They still need to release and finish it, of course, but the support they've gotten so far has shown that catering to a specific audience can be fruitful.

 

[Xenich]

I haven't been following Pantheon developments lately (or this thread) but I'm looking forward to the live stream today to see what they've got. It's not til 4:00 PM Pst, but people are already chatting in there.

And I'm with Xenich regarding keeping it not mainstream. That would defeat their whole purpose. Project Gorgon has sort of proved you can make a niche MMO and have enough audience to fund it. They still need to release and finish it, of course, but the support they've gotten so far has shown that catering to a specific audience can be fruitful.

Honestly Alchemist, I think this game is doomed to mainstream failure. With EQ Next being cancelled, and the fact that a good portion of the players supporting Pantheon are mainstream leaning players, I just don't see this turning out well. I have watched the early days of this games forums, before the revamp and there was a very distinct goal of the supporters. That has slowly changed over time and now I see more and more "mainstream" support being added. People fighting game play elements. They want easier death penalties, maps to show them their way, fast travel to make such easy, a demand for solo content, attending to appearance slots, etc....

I can only speculate, as I have done before, but I bet with the release of the game play footage today, the hype will only continue. Mainstream will latch on to this game like it was the next savior and by the time the game releases, it will be akin to Vanguard FTP era (not to say it will be FTP, but the game play features will be similar).

I have lost faith in the game developers to see real game play implemented, why.... ? I can not say for sure, but I can say that "game play" is dead in most peoples minds. I can only think that years of mainstream concepts of "entertainment" being drummed into developers and players heads that has lead us to games which are akin to the "reality" TV shows. Meaningless, pointless, wastes of thought to attend emotional responses outside of intelligent thought or purpose.


If I am wrong, I will happily be so. I don't doubt that the developers of Pantheon TRULY want a "game play" experience, but they are outnumbered and if they are able to achieve a true attempt at a real "game", then I will be astounded! I just don't see them pulling it off. There are too many "non-gamers" driving opinions that will piss on the game.

 

[Aenra]

New smoke signals, they travel far. Computarhs do miracles, spirits almost jealous. Now watch and shut up. Dumb hoomans. Talk so much it gets bored. Also smelly.. pff..

 

[Xenich]

The mobs die way too fast. I was counting the averages and they kill the mobs in less than 10 seconds. This concerns me greatly because if they do not attend to this, the game will run into numerous problems with strategy and ability design/execution. Anyone who has played DDO knows what I am talking about here and how fast kill means little time to implement tactics and the game becomes a DPS kill fest (or a twitch arcade game). There was a point where one mob was hitting on the caster who over agroed, the mob was still full health and the players turned to it, and burned it down all the while it was beating on the caster. In EQ, "burning down" the mob was not a few second thing and so not really an option. the tank had to use their ability to gain agro and the player with agro has to cease all action, or use deagro abilities to get it off.

Now I know this is pre-alpha, and I expect some tuning to happen over time, but this is so fast in kills that it concerns me. If they think 6 seconds is a sufficient time to kill trash, it means the "adjustments" will likely not be far off.

Other problems I noticed is how several people were soloing the mobs they were fighting and still killing too fast.

One of the devs said in the forums that they were tuning slowly as they add more complex features and don't want to end up going completely in the other direction, and sure... at this stage you are not "balancing" the game, but I always felt it is better to start "too hard", "too long", etc... that the opposite as this tells you more about your design than fast paced combat and kills.

It may be just that they wanted to show off the game at a quicker pace, to be able to fit everything they wanted to show in. Time will tell, but what worried me even more was that there wasn't as many complaints about that. There were hundreds of complaints about looks, animations, etc... all things that are unimportant to game play (which was what this was supposed to show case), but very few comments about detailed mechanics. That tells me a lot about the audience and makes me think this game could easily end up being yet another "convert" for the mainstream crowd over time.

 

[Xenich]

Here is something that has always been a petpeeve of mine.... 3rd person.

Spoiler

Notice the above comparisons. That is an exact same situation taken from first person and then 3rd person.

Notice how much game play is lost with the 3rd person? In the first person screen, you can only see the mob, you are limited to your view of the surroundings. This limitation creates tension, a constant need to be aware of your surroundings. It makes fighting in places where there is pathing mobs very dangerous. It makes spell meditation even more dangerous (as you can not turn and look while sitting focused on meditation). This provides the fear of "unexpected add" and this view provides so many additions to add to game play be it class/race abilities and the like. You could even create a spell that a shaman could use that occasionally allows them to project an astral essence out of their body to see around them in 3rd person for a limited time (ie game play).

What we have these days is used more as a "cheat" for convenience than a game play element. Notice how in the second screen I have 2 other mobs attacking me and I didn't even see them in first person. Also, think about how much more first person provides meaning to surround sound and other elements of location awareness in play. It is just a petpeeve as I said, but I think 3rd person kills so much potential in game play and its justification is really just one of a convenience, as I said.. a cheat to avoid game play.

I hope that Pantheon creates a "forced" first person server, no camera use at all as the 3rd person play really just gives far too many advantages.

 

[Aenra]

This is why people don't have conversations with you..

- you cannot call something "cheating" when it is available to everyone; and simultaneously at that
- you cannot call something "cheating" when it is not only available to everyone, but is also taken under consideration during game development. Environmental hazards, further emphasis on need for situational awareness, a 360 threat radius, mechanics complimenting the above and so on. Precisely so as to account for said availability and balance the odds
- you cannot attempt or appear to confuse the technological limitations of one period with the existence of 'vision'/'philosophy'. At any each time, the maker creates with the tools at hand
- you definitely cannot mistake a broadening of possibilities as a form of "cheating" against the very people that are to benefit from said progress

What you possibly meant to say was that your preferences are different, in that you'd prefer a strictly first person mode view. Different thing; and you're definitely entitled to viewing it thus. Skip the projecting though.

 

[Xenich]

This is why people don't have conversations with you..

- you cannot call something "cheating" when it is available to everyone; and simultaneously at that
- you cannot call something "cheating" when it is not only available to everyone, but is also taken under consideration during game development. Environmental hazards, further emphasis on need for situational awareness, a 360 threat radius, mechanics complimenting the above and so on. Precisely so as to account for said availability and balance the odds
- you cannot attempt or appear to confuse the technological limitations of one period with the existence of 'vision'/'philosophy'. At any each time, the maker creates with the tools at hand
- you definitely cannot mistake a broadening of possibilities as a form of "cheating" against the very people that are to benefit from said progress

What you possibly meant to say was that your preferences are different, in that you'd prefer a strictly first person mode view. Different thing; and you're definitely entitled to viewing it thus. Skip the projecting though.

Context Aenra, context.

I am talking about it cheating "game play", not cheating someone else.

If you have a auto-map system, it cheats the "game play" of having to explore and learn the zone.

If you have 3rd person camera view, it cheats the "game play" of being aware, of having a sudden add you didn't see.

Context, context... for the love of sanity, context!


First person vs 3rd person may be a "preference", but the fact is that 3rd person "cheats" game play elements. It is why people like it as first person constrains their view, making is much more limited and dangerous to explore the game. You can't see around corners, you can't see behind you without constantly changing your view area.

So, yes... it is "cheating" game play and if you listen to the arguments for 3rd person, most of them are about the "convenience" of the view, not because it provides some sort of game play element in a game like EQ.

Now granted, you can develop a game to have "game play" using 3rd person view, but games like EQ or Panthoen do not have game play elements incorporated into the view. 3rd person view is a direct advantage over first person because it cheats elements of game play that first person requires.

The reason people like you have trouble discussing is because you make assumptions constantly, and you are the worst about it. Add in your pretentious nature in that evaluation and you come off as an arrogant ass hole.

Don't "assume" with me, and false summarize, ask if you have a question, otherwise you just look like an idiot.

 

[Aenra]

...
The context is the system, the camera mode. In itself. Not your opinion. Your opinion lies ON it. ON the system. Sans the system context, i would have been unable to even grasp your opinion, let alone its implications. And as far as (indeed) context may be concerned?

Auto-map has nothing to do with camera modes, can exist in either or none. Why the hell do you even mention this..?
The second and last point you make? Namely "game play"? You don't get to 'cheat' yourself out of that. In first person mode, you're meant to be capable of seeing or 'expecting' a mob/add coming at you from behind/flanks. In third person mode, you're expected to be able to spot it even faster, because it runs faster, and hits relatively harder. You are also meant to spot it faster while simultaneously avoiding ground traps/hazards, keeping an eye for your shaman's ground AoEs, planning your escape route while taking that boulder blocking your way under consideration, etc etc.
As i said, mechanics and systems added so as to account for the extra awareness alloted to you. And everyone else. Equal hazards, equal ways of coping. Ergo, no 'cheating', not even metaphorically.

You do this in regard to other systems as well. You are so stuck on seeing things -one- way, you are incapable of distinguishing between a good system (potentially) and a bad implementation (empirically).
Again, you are not entitled, let alone forced, to conceive of a better implementation. Forget trying it. Your call, your preference. But it remains just that. A personal peeve, based on nothing but subjectivity. Accepted, as such. Denied, if posted as fact. In as far as your opinion may be concerned, yes, noted. Even thus however, "cheating" is the wrong term. The connotations it has or allows for are absent here. Hence my post above.

A post you appear to have discarded entirely, lol, while sticking to your projecting your opinion (which again, i respect) as fact. Which it is not.

 

[Xenich]

...
The context is the system, the camera mode. In itself. Not your opinion. Your opinion lies ON it. ON the system. Sans the system context, i would have been unable to even grasp your opinion, let alone its implications. And as far as (indeed) context may be concerned?

The context is game play, and how certain elements remove game play elements. With first person, there is game play, with 3rd person, many game play elements are removed as I explained.

...
Auto-map has nothing to do with camera modes, can exist in either or none. Why the hell do you even mention this..?

Lets see, because I was not sure what you were talking about because you did not quote specifically. Maybe next time, quote things and we can avoid confusion? Maybe?

...
As i said, mechanics and systems added so as to account for the extra awareness alloted to you. And everyone else. Equal hazards, equal ways of coping. Ergo, no 'cheating', not even metaphorically.

IF and ONLY IF those are specifically designed in and even still it cheats the basic game play aspects of first person view. That is, you get to see those behind you, around you and with full clarity, so yes... it cheats certain elements of game play and MAY implement others for 3rd person. Like I said, avoiding things, paying attention to your surroundings (even fast running mobs) can all be done with first person as well, it is just that people don't get the freebie birds eye view in the process making it more difficult than 3rd person view.

...
You do this in regard to other systems as well. You are so stuck on seeing things -one- way; you are incapable of distinguishing between a good system (potentially) and a bad implementation (empirically).
Again, you are not entitled, let alone forced, to conceive of a better implementation. Forget trying it. Your call, your preference. But it remains just that. A personal peeve, based on nothing but subjectivity. Accepted, as such. Denied, if posted as fact. In as far as your opinion may be concerned, noted. Even thus, "cheating" is the wrong term. The connotations it has or allows for are absent here. Hence my post above.

Every point I make, is supported by objective evaluation and logical establishments. You did not counter them, you gave some examples of how 3rd person can have game play. Remember though, that not every game provides this and what is even more important is if Pantheon provides this. Did you see any evidence of your arcade solution based play in the Pantheon video?

...
A post you appear to have discarded entirely, lol, while sticking to your projecting your opinion (which again, i respect) as fact. Which it is not.

What I did was attend to some things I knew you were going to bring up.

My point stands.

3rd person cheats first person view out of game play elements. The fact that a game "can" implement additional game play elements that specifically uses 3rd person does not invalidate that point.

 

[Xenich]

...
The second and last point you make? Namely "game play"? You don't get to 'cheat' yourself out of that. In first person mode, you're meant to be capable of seeing or 'expecting' a mob/add coming at you from behind/flanks. In third person mode, you're expected to be able to spot it even faster, because it runs faster, and hits relatively harder. You are also meant to spot it faster while simultaneously avoiding ground traps/hazards, keeping an eye for your shaman's ground AoEs, planning your escape route while taking that boulder blocking your way under consideration, etc etc.

I pulled this out specifically alone, because I find it confusing in the point you are making.

What does "In first person mode, you're meant to be capable of seeing or 'expecting' a mob/add coming at you from behind/flanks." this mean? You are meant to be capable of it how? By turning around and looking constantly (that is what the game play part is, not being able to see everything at once, having to constantly look around, etc... ? I don't understand what you mean here.

So in 3rd person you are... supposed to do it faster? What does that mean? I gave you a visual example of how in first person, your visual range is limited, making you constantly shift and pay attention to your surroundings and because of this, your chance of having a mob rush up on you as you did not notice it is greatly increased. So you point about you are required to see it faster is odd. I know of no mobs running faster between the views in EQ and why would that make any difference? Not to mention, 3rd person allows a wide view often to the point where there is no "sneaking up" on a player. In fact, I have never had any issues of an add I didn't see due to the advantages a 3rd person view gives.

As for your "traps/hazards", well... you can do all of that in first person as well. In fact, it is a common form of play in most older shooters, specifically games like Portal and Half-life, so 3rd person didn't bring anything new to the game here.

This brings us back to what did 3rd person bring? Well.. it brought the ability to see behind you and completely around you. It provided a much easier means to judge spacial relationship between obstacles (ie where am I in direct relation to that obstacle/trap/hazard), it provided a means to see around corners, etc...

Nope, not cheats at all.. it is... as you said "a preference", I mean... just as lets say the guy who likes to buy their items in a RMT store so they can circumvent game play is, you know... just a preference. /boggle

edit:

I want to be clear here. I do understand the point you are trying to get at concerning 3rd person and how it can have game play elements added to the game that directly attend and require that form of view, but honestly... I don't think there are many examples out there that really are trying to stress the game play in that view.

I think most developers don't even think about it and even if there turns out to be something that ends up working as such, it is often by accident. Like I said, everything you mentioned has been done with first person, 3rd person merely makes it easier.

I think you would really have to put some extreme thought to make 3rd person more of a game play element than what you can already do with first person. Fact is, 3rd person is predominately used a "preference" such as you mentioned, but one that serves convenience, not game play in most games.

 

[Xenich]

Another one of my "pet peeves" concerning gaming.

The claim that "Lower levels should be learning levels", that is... more forgiving, hand held, etc...

WRONG. Learning is part of playing a game and why you have a manual. This instructs you on the rules of the game. After that, your adventure begins and you must LEARN to be successful in the game dealing with each obstacle that occurs through a process of failure and eventual success, not to mention learning more about the game as you play. This idea that the game should be easier or more forgiving at the early levels is not the thinking of a gamer, but the thinking of some entertainment seeking lackey that expects the game to cater to their every whim (ie the mainstreamer, the Destroyer of Games). The only reason to make such things is because the game designer is trying to market to a wider audience, again.. another strategy which has resulted in killing games.

I have mixed feelings on tutorials as they could be argued as just an interactive manual, but these should exist outside of the game, not be a means where the player is given freebies at the early part of the game or has the rules removed or reduced in early play so as not to upset the player. If person gets frustrated at learning, they will get frustrated at having to learn later in the game as well. This sort of hand holding sets a bad precedence. Not only that, but it takes up game world play to cater to people who really don't like playing games anyway. I say if a person would not play the game because they are required to read the manual and then learn play as they go through the game, then those are people you don't want playing your game as they will be a thorn in your side whining and complaining constantly about one thing after another. These are the people that destroy games.

 

[Xenich]

This is the kind of discussion that bothers me. Note, the response to the poster is from one of the self proclaimed "old school" EQ players from the Pantheon supporters.

If any of you watched the stream, the mobs were dying extremely fast. When I say fast, I mean like around 6 seconds or so. It was so bad that the wizard "mont" was solo burning down mobs as he just stood there and he didn't even need much healing in the process.

Poster 1: Somehow OP didn't notice how fast mobs were dying. That wizard could've solo kited half those encounters to death.

Poser Old School poster: Ya. On one occasion they rooted a yellow or red con orc and all just nuked it down from full to dead. In EQ, there was around a 20% chance for any spell to break a root, so that sort of thing was unusual.

I'm sure they realize this though, and will implement things like that in due time.

Now this "old school" player seemed to not be concerned about the time it took to kill the mob, nope... his response was that the solution to that was that they would put in resists. This is why Pantheon is in serious trouble if they listen to these idiots.

Mob health (or the balance between damage/health) is the number one problem with most games today and why strategy comes down to just DPS every time. If they apply the solution that Mr. Old school suggests, the game will result in a low health concept of "first to kill" which is a huge problem in DDO right now where everything is about who gets off the one shot first. All concepts of "game play" have been removed so that players can feel good about themselves as they mow things down like it was a console arcade game.

This is why I am losing faith that VR will produce a good game and why they will end up with yet another mainstream product. If the so called "old school" players don't have a problem with mobs dying ridiculously fast, then they will be useless come beta where all of this balancing will need to be ironed out. Brad in the early days of Verant used to tell people to piss off (nicely) if they didn't like his vision, but these days I have seen him change too quickly to public sway. It is almost like he is afraid people won't like him if he stands firm. With the inept posing "old school" players moderating over the hordes of mainstream arguments, I just don't see this turning out well. Most of those "old school" gamers on those forums were mere kids during release EQ. They claim otherwise, but if you watch closely their comments in other threads, and how they let some things slip, most were just children back then.