No one (that I've seen) that is aganist appearance gear is asking for low to mid level gear to look ugly, rather, that gear retain its visual meaning by being recognizable and not watered down by weapon mods or armor skins. Raid gear could very well look the ugliest. Mid-level gear could have great graphics as well. That part is subjective anyhow.
No one (that I've seen) that is aganist appearance gear is asking for low to mid level gear to look ugly, rather, that gear retain its visual meaning by being recognizable and not watered down by weapon mods or armor skins. Raid gear could very well look the ugliest. Mid-level gear could have great graphics as well. That part is subjective anyhow.
What would be nice is if they put effort into the gear's look knowing it is a game play element. Then they could have varying levels of quality of look based on the risk/reward. Also, themes of gear style and look should differ from location to location based on the lore, race, etc... (ie undead lich has a shredded robe of a noble or academic, etc...).
If they put and appropriate amount of attention into this, there is no reason that the "looks" of a gear can't be quite the carrot in play following in the same spirit of risk vs reward as the rest of the game.
I think this has been discussed in the past but, what is the
consensus on a basic /hidehelm function? Rather than talk about changing the
skin of an item, what about hiding it completely?
I can see two sides:
Hide-Helm is unrealistic. If you’re wearing something, it should look
like you’re wearing it. If you’re not
wearing something, you should be at a disadvantage.
Or
The idea that wearing a leather cap gives you +2
AC and +5 STA is unrealistic and you should be allowed to customize your character’s
look without penalty.
The developers decide what equipment has what stats, and
effectively they create BIS items. If a
player wants to not wear something for roleplaying/customization reasons, they
put themselves at a disadvantage.
This is a PVE fantasy game.
If it was a hyper-realistic medieval combat simulator like Kingdom Come:
Deliverance, I could understand the desire to force these restrictions on
players. But we have players running
into battle carrying books that give them +12 INT. Even Aragorn heads into battle without a
helmet on.
I think this has been discussed in the past but, what is the
consensus on a basic /hidehelm function? Rather than talk about changing the
skin of an item, what about hiding it completely?
I can see two sides:
Hide-Helm is unrealistic. If you’re wearing something, it should look
like you’re wearing it. If you’re not
wearing something, you should be at a disadvantage.
Or
The idea that wearing a leather cap gives you +2
AC and +5 STA is unrealistic and you should be allowed to customize your character’s
look without penalty.
The developers decide what equipment has what stats, and
effectively they create BIS items. If a
player wants to not wear something for roleplaying/customization reasons, they
put themselves at a disadvantage.
This is a PVE fantasy game.
If it was a hyper-realistic medieval combat simulator like Kingdom Come:
Deliverance, I could understand the desire to force these restrictions on
players. But we have players running
into battle carrying books that give them +12 INT. Even Aragorn heads into battle without a
helmet on.
In "honest" realism arguments, it is a matter of practicality to the games world. An item being magical and establishing a given amount of protection or power is an internal aspect of the games world and is reasoned according to its relative design structure. So, such an item is "reasonable" in an internal evaluation of the worlds reality.
The problem with appearance tabs is they are an external element, not an internal one. There is no practical or reasonable existence for them within the games reality as they sit outside of it (much like the /loc command).
A practical and reasonable feature that is internal would be players being able to modify the looks of a given item through various means (dyes, tailoring, smiting, etc....). This is reasonable as it "fits" within the nature of the games world (I am not arguing for this, just giving it as an example of internal consistency).
Now certainly you can go out on a limb and declare the wildest of things to be "part of the lore/world", but then we get into the realms of a fantasy system being consistent or "believable" within its own reality. If it is poorly explained and implemented, it might as well be just a trump card to justify anything that is out of place. At that point, the fictional system fails as it has no rhyme or reason which is a major point of pulling someone into the game and making them "believe" the world.
Having an external appearance slot that somehow magically disappears peoples clothing making them appear as something else while at the same time retaining the value of item that disappeared has so many reality inconsistencies that it gets kind of silly.
As for Aragorn, sure... but is he wearing a helmet? Nope. You might have a point if he was wearing a helmet and it just didn't appear. People are free to go as Aragorn and not wear a helmet, and just like Aragorn, they will be unprotected on their head.
As for the books of intelligence. A tome of magical power that bestows upon the owner a magical clarity of thought? That is entirely consistent within the concept of a magical world as we often see in such games. The issue is not "real", it is "realism" and a book of such power is consistent in "realism" of such a magical world. Where we should have issues in these discussions is where the feature or contention in the world doesn't even fit its own fictional reality or... it is so poorly explained that it is an obvious issue.
So, the issue then becomes of the arguments on the "for appearance tabs", how can your feature be implemented in a way that respects the games reality, its "realism" while still attending to game play?
Can someone who is against optional appearance tabs please explain to me in detail why this is a bad feature?
* No one is asking for clown outfits or tuxedos or any other crazyness
*It could be restricted to class specific gear, so no tanks wearing cloth vise verse
*Its optional so you don't even have to use it
*It could be limited to armor only no weapons
*Actually could add immersion in case the game doesn't have enough variety of gear, now we can look different, I would much rather have an epic set be original and not look like a clone of potentially hundreds of other toons
*Would add value to lower level gear, I remember when playing eqoa I sold a healer robe I believe that was special because of the color. It meant nothing to me since I had no idea the value. So I tossed it on the broker cheap and few minutes later got a tell from the buyer of its value.
Scumm made an excellent point in a previous post. Why is it ok to have hide helmet option, that is a very similar feature. I'm sure that will be in game so if no one complains about that why all the fuss over appearance tabs.
I've seen alot of opinions on why not to have it such as they want to see what the player has achieved, or want to be able to have a status on every ones achievements, or its silly and breaks immersion which I absolutely disagree with unless they put in clown suits which I know they wont. As far as status from gear, no ones stopping anyone if they want to prance around town showing how uber they are. I and I'm sure many others could care less, it's about the type of person you are not how good you are.
Now on the other hand if Pantheon was able to make such a large variety or armor / weapon graphics that gave plenty of options that peeps could actually live with I could see why we could live without appearance tabs. It's a tall task that not many mmo's have done well imo.
This is one of those issues I'm conflicted about, I give you my avatar picture as an example. I was a paladin with blue metal arms, blue metal pants, a leather chest slot, and a gold helm. I essentially looked ridiculous.
However, I get why they are so against it, as one of the coolest things in EQ was seeing someone run by and knowing exactly what they were wearing by the looks. Probably the most easily recognizable example of this was the golden efreeti boots. Seeing a druid run by in a bunch of green and brown with super shiny golden boots was cool, and was somewhat of a status symbol.
I really would be ok with either method. I liked in Rift being able to equip my hard earned super high end gear from Hammerknell (the set on the right: http://tinyurl.com/j8399n6), even far later into the game, because it was cool and I worked really hard for it.
I see both sides, and its one of those few things that ill be "ok" with either decision.
It's like when you see a cop or military person in uniform. You automatically know what their general job is. Then they go undercover in a hot dog suit with a squirt gun and you know exactly what they are about.
Can someone who is against optional appearance tabs please explain to me in detail why this is a bad feature?
My position on it is that it works against game play. How you look is a
goal of play and should be a continued requirement of progression to
achieve. It should be a continued carrot, not a convenience.
Can someone who is against optional appearance tabs please explain to me in detail why this is a bad feature?
My position on it is that it works against game play. How you look is a
goal of play and should be a continued requirement of progression to
achieve. It should be a continued carrot, not a convenience.
I agree with you that it should be a carrot, but I also believe this would add to the carrot. If i liked a certain set of armor that I thought was cool it would be even more enticing for me to try and put together a group for that particular organic quest of my own making. By having that feature it just added original content made by the player. Now imagine that with several other players, so I think the benefits out way the negatives.
I see what you’re saying about the consistency of logic in a
magical world, and I agree. I wasn’t
suggesting that the magical tome was inconsistent. My point is that if we’re willing to believe
that a Stein or Tome could have magical advantages, why can’t we believe that
players could head into battle without a helmet on and be ok?
You’re right that appearance slots are an external
element. That it requires a suspension
of disbelief, even within the context of the game world. The problem is that we’re at the mercy of the
designers. If they decide to make an
item that is clearly the best to use, anyone who wishes to use a different item
is at a disadvantage.
I’m not suggesting this, but here is a potential different
path: Players loot ‘magical orbs’ that
can imbue better stats to any armor they wish to augment. That way players get to wear what they like
for their character, but not be at a disadvantage.
The reason I don’t like that idea is because it prevents
iconic items from existing. The same
could be said for dyeing or manipulating existing armor to look differently. They no longer look like the iconic
item.
I don’t think of appearance slots as ‘magically
disappearing’ clothing, I think of it as “This is what I WOULD be wearing if
the developer-chosen stats didn’t put me at a disadvantage”. I would rather see this ‘unrealistic’
external solution than be forced to wear the same BIS that everyone else is
wearing.
My position on it is that it works against game play. How you look is a
goal of play and should be a continued requirement of progression to
achieve. It should be a continued carrot, not a convenience.
This is just it though.
If I think my character looks great with the plain black level 1 cloak,
but I’ve just looted a Cloak of Flames that makes me look like I’m on fire, the desire
to improve my ‘look’ was not the reason to obtain the better item.
Can someone who is against optional appearance tabs please explain to me in detail why this is a bad feature?
My position on it is that it works against game play. How you look is a
goal of play and should be a continued requirement of progression to
achieve. It should be a continued carrot, not a convenience.
I agree with you that it should be a carrot, but I also believe this would add to the carrot. If i liked a certain set of armor that I thought was cool it would be even more enticing for me to try and put together a group for that particular organic quest of my own making. By having that feature it just added original content made by the player. Now imagine that with several other players, so I think the benefits out way the negatives.
I am not sure I am following you. Not having appearance tabs would not change the fact that if you wanted to look a certain way, you would have to go out and gain those items. More so, by your look being directly attached to your usable gear, you will always be chasing that carrot as you continue to upgrade your gear. It would be an on going process.
Now consider people like my friend who go out and find their "look" and then never change out again. My friend was like that in EQ2. He found a couple of items he liked when he was level 2 and he looked the same at level 60. He had no desire to change his look, he was happy with it.
So, no carrot, no continued requirement of play. By looking like what you use, it drives the player to constantly seek out something they will be happy with and this becomes a circular process.
I see what you’re saying about the consistency of logic in a
magical world, and I agree. I wasn’t
suggesting that the magical tome was inconsistent. My point is that if we’re willing to believe
that a Stein or Tome could have magical advantages, why can’t we believe that
players could head into battle without a helmet on and be ok?
You’re right that appearance slots are an external
element. That it requires a suspension
of disbelief, even within the context of the game world. The problem is that we’re at the mercy of the
designers. If they decide to make an
item that is clearly the best to use, anyone who wishes to use a different item
is at a disadvantage.
I’m not suggesting this, but here is a potential different
path: Players loot ‘magical orbs’ that
can imbue better stats to any armor they wish to augment. That way players get to wear what they like
for their character, but not be at a disadvantage.
The reason I don’t like that idea is because it prevents
iconic items from existing. The same
could be said for dyeing or manipulating existing armor to look differently. They no longer look like the iconic
item.
I don’t think of appearance slots as ‘magically
disappearing’ clothing, I think of it as “This is what I WOULD be wearing if
the developer-chosen stats didn’t put me at a disadvantage”. I would rather see this ‘unrealistic’
external solution than be forced to wear the same BIS that everyone else is
wearing.
I wasn't advocating for the being able to change the armor, just pointing out how it fits an internal consistency within the world. Like you, I think being able to modify armor too much takes away its iconic nature. Though I have discussed solutions to this in much more detail in previous threads.
Well, I understand your point about BIS, but if Pantheon turns out with itemization that truly has BIS gear, then it has failed in its itemization. This goes for variety in gear as well. So the real solution is that they have a wide variety and a itemization system that isn't a rubber stamp that happens so often in games today.
Scumm said: This is just it though.
If I think my character looks great with the plain black level 1 cloak,
but I’ve just looted a Cloak of Flames that makes me look like I’m on fire, the desire
to improve my ‘look’ was not the reason to obtain the better item.
That is part of the process though. You had a cool black cloak before, this new one doesn't go as well with your current setup, but in your pursuit of better gear, maybe that cloaks look now drives you to find a new look. A continued process of ever changing gear and looks. Part of game play is having something throw a hitch into your plans to which you then have to find another solution to.
There are other ways to deal with appearance though that respects the iconic look of an item, but allows for a change to "somewhat" customize it to a given taste. Also, if they design the items with respect to this issue, I think a lot of the problems that exist can be reduced to acceptable levels.
In the early days of games, where there were no appearance slots and itemization was more of a mix/match style of items, I personally had interest in my characters looks. That is, how my character looked was an element of pride and accomplishment and that was why I was interested.
As years went on and character looks became less about accomplishment, less about your efforts in game and more about cash stores, holiday gimmicks, etc... I stopped caring about my characters looks as it really had no meaning in game play.
Well, I understand your point about BIS, but if Pantheon turns out with itemization that truly has BIS gear, then it has failed in its itemization. This goes for variety in gear as well. So the real solution is that they have a wide variety and a itemization system that isn't a rubber stamp that happens so often in games today.
Still believe in appearance gear change of some kind.
This might be what peeps are worried about including myself, having faith in the graphic artists is a start.
From my point of view I get more immersed if my toon looks the part, I get that its part of the game to get to that point. Its just not as fun constantly having blue pants with orange chest or whatever. If the game solves that then should be fine.
Also still find it enticing to use older crafted or loot gear for appearance, holds value a little more that way.
Well, I understand your point about BIS, but if Pantheon turns out with itemization that truly has BIS gear, then it has failed in its itemization. This goes for variety in gear as well. So the real solution is that they have a wide variety and a itemization system that isn't a rubber stamp that happens so often in games today.
Still believe in appearance gear change of some kind.
This might be what peeps are worried about including myself, having faith in the graphic artists is a start.
From my point of view I get more immersed if my toon looks the part, I get that its part of the game to get to that point. Its just not as fun constantly having blue pants with orange chest or whatever. If the game solves that then should be fine.
Also still find it enticing to use older crafted or loot gear for appearance, holds value a little more that way.
Well, there were a varied amount of suggestions in a previous thread where we talked about "appearance" slots to the gear slots themselves. So, you might have a chest slot with your breastplate item, but you can add a sash to that slot which would overlay the breastplate to an extent. You could have a pants slot where you put on leg knife belt, etc... There was even talk about allowing maybe an addition to an item (adding shoulder guard or the like).
The point is not to allow the original item to be modified too much, but... to allow for more unique customization. These "additions" could be drops and crafting items that could "accent" gear, but not take away its over all look.
A system like that combined with some effort to the variation of selections in the gear with some basic color symmetry to match themes and I think they could achieve an acceptable compromise for players who want the ability to be flexible in their appearance. This would keep in line with game play, uniqueness, and basic "realism" within the game itself.
It has been said that roughly 10% of the game will be solo, 80% will be grouping and 10% raiding. "[T]he majority of content is being designed for grouping, with the remainder for soloing or raiding." Pantheon FAQ.
If this is true, then why are we back to being expected to stand around and oooh and ahhh over raiders? Why is that supposed to be our "inspiration?"
If I proposed that the best armor be awarded to solo players, people would jump on that and say "this is a grouping game."
Well is it?
Or is it a raid e-peenism game?
If there are already huge fights just to be sure non-raiders will nothave good looking armors (which is the silliest thing I have ever seen), then it doesn't seem like a grouping oriented game.
I just don't understand this mentality. The only conclusion I can come to is it's pure jealousy. It's basically MMO socialism. You have to restrict the "rich" (or in this case, the people who have more time for whatever reason to invest into the MMO) from having good items... because of... yeah, that's right, jealousy that you don't have more time or can't invest more time into the game.
Nobody can have Porsche 911's because 90% of the population can't afford them, and clearly the only reason people buy them is so they can drive around lording them over all the poor peasants. Replace Porsche 911's with raid gear, and "peasents" with "casuals" and all of sudden you have the same argument, which I've seen made time and time again against "raiders" and "raiding". It's not that raiders actually enjoy the aspects of working together to achieve a goal, no, it's only that they want the phat lewtz so they can e-peen around all the casual filth.
I'm really getting tired of this mentality in the MMO community. The FOCUS of the game can be on grouping while still providing raiders with something to do and rewards that are in line with that activity. Focus doesn't mean to the exclusion of everything else.
Just like the game can focus on grouping and still provide soloer's with path's to progression. They may not be the most efficient paths compared to grouping. They may not provide the best rewards. But they can exist.
"The surest way to corrupt a youth is to instruct him to hold in higher esteem those who think alike than those who think differently."
I'm really getting tired of this mentality in the MMO community.
Likewise, I get tired of people playing video games and pretending it's work. And worse, playing video games, pretending it's work, and then lecturing others about how they lack sufficient work ethic.
When Brad McQuaid and Kilsin come on here, or when they play Pantheon, they are working. The rest of us are just screwing around.
But that's not really the issue and I don't want to sidetrack the thread.
I didn't start a post complaining that the "haves" should have less, or be deprived of anything.
I do raise what I think is a valid issue of who the "haves" ought to be. It seems strange to make grouping the focus of the game and make the "haves" somebody else?
Others posted that the "have less" should not be allowed to make appearance armor choices that make their characters more fun for them to play. And that somehow, this would deprive the "haves" of the proper homage we are all supposed to pay them.
The jealousy you speak of seems more to me like people needing personal validation from their gaming.
I don't have to have the best things. I don't need to look the best. And if there are no skins, fine by me. I enjoyed gaming long before that was even invented.
Just so long as the game doesn't do anything stupidly punitive clothing-wise - so that a 100 folks or so on a server can feel special.
EQ1, EQ2, SWG, SWTOR, GW, GW2 CoH, CoV, FFXI, WoW, CO, War,TSW and a slew of free trials and beta tests
I am not sure what people are on about or what they are looking for.A game should simply have lots of gear choice and it should be relevant in various ways which ties back into depth of systems. I can tell you that my ONLY peeve over the years is seeing Brad+++ whomever else was involved giving clerics plate armor,the same as a Tank.
If there is "reasoning" behind it ,they snubbed that reasoning by then giving the cleric less defense.I do not believe in those type of fake systems,your defense should simply be your armor and your agility/avoidance there should not be separate defense and "mitigation" ideas.
Then if we are assuming FANTASY we can accept as plausible magical gear.That should of course me more valuable as well as open the door to more depth in your combat to which SOE/Brad +++ and company have never done much to enhance.
There is a long long list of stuff i really like about this game,all done the way i like to see it done but there are still many areas that scare me about Brad's vision for game design.Well not so much scare me but will not be in line with the other plausible ideas,example one VERY important one is altaholic gaming,just wrong wrong wrong.
Never forget 3 mile Island and never trust a government official or company spokesman.
If they do have the system in place, the only limits i would say is 1) keep it to the classes gear type and 2) don't add goofy dress up gear like swim suits and stuff that half the people end up running around in all the time. id rather people just wear what they want while they are in town and whatnot, but out in a boss fight or raid i really would prefer half the group not to be wearing underwear only or goofy clown like stuff just because they think its funny.
I also enjoyed the idea (at least in FFXI) that i could see someones high end gear and check them right away because i wanted to know what BA piece they had (like relic weapons) i also liked the fact that you could generally tell what class they were when you looked at them, even classes that used multiple weapons.
I'm really getting tired of this mentality in the MMO community.
Likewise, I get tired of people playing video games and pretending it's work. And worse, playing video games, pretending it's work, and then lecturing others about how they lack sufficient work ethic.
When Brad McQuaid and Kilsin come on here, or when they play Pantheon, they are working. The rest of us are just screwing around.
But that's not really the issue and I don't want to sidetrack the thread.
I didn't start a post complaining that the "haves" should have less, or be deprived of anything.
I do raise what I think is a valid issue of who the "haves" ought to be. It seems strange to make grouping the focus of the game and make the "haves" somebody else?
Others posted that the "have less" should not be allowed to make appearance armor choices that make their characters more fun for them to play. And that somehow, this would deprive the "haves" of the proper homage we are all supposed to pay them.
The jealousy you speak of seems more to me like people needing personal validation from their gaming.
I don't have to have the best things. I don't need to look the best. And if there are no skins, fine by me. I enjoyed gaming long before that was even invented.
Just so long as the game doesn't do anything stupidly punitive clothing-wise - so that a 100 folks or so on a server can feel special.
You are setting up a straw man. Nobody (or almost nobody) is pretending its work. But every hobby has opportunity costs. If you want to become a competitive chess player, you have to invest a lot of time in it. If you want to be a competitive downhill skier, you have to invest time into it. Many times this comes at the detriment of your other hobbies or desires.
I get where you are coming from, and certainly some people DO treat MMO's as work. But trying to white wash raiders that way is disingenuous. I also apologize, I didn't mean to imply any of that to you personally, I don't really know you or your desires as far as gaming. I'm just saying that there is large, and I do mean large, faction of the MMO playerbase who literally view raiders as the worst scum on the planet, and unfortunately they're such a large group that they've been able to shape developers and MMOs so their will, and are one of if not the primary reason we have a bunch of on rails, solo quest hub faceroll easy mmos.
At the end of the day, if some neckbeard basement dweller that has no job or responsibilities, elects to spend 18 hours a day 7 days a week playing the game, and gets some super rare super badass item... does it REALLY affect you? Really?
I constantly remember the arguments people made along the lines of "I pay $15 a month and I should get to see everything the game has to offer for that!", which basically translated to "all the content needs to cater to my inability to play more than 30-40 minutes 2 or 3 times a week, and if there is any content that requires more effort than that, then I am being cheated out of my money." I tried to explain to these people its like paying a gym membership. You are paying for access to the gym (or content in this case), you're not paying for a 6 pack of abs, or for 22" biceps. You have to put in effort to get those. Everything in life has opportunity costs.
This is why I say its just pure jealousy. You interpret people who think the idea of seeing some guy run by with a super rare item and being able to identify it via looks as that person requiring people to "pay homage" to them. While that does happen, the reality is the more often occurrence is that people see them run by and say "cool man, one day I'd like to have that item!". Too many have this mentality that if someone has something nice, that it means they must have either stepped on the heads of someone to get it, or that they stole it from someone.
People like "earning" things, even if those things are pixels on a screen. It gives people joy and happiness. Do some people do things for the wrong reasons. Obviously. But you don't create policies that detract from the majority to police the few when they are victimless "crimes".
"The surest way to corrupt a youth is to instruct him to hold in higher esteem those who think alike than those who think differently."
@zanfire, I too like to see what others have been able to acquire in a game, but as long as you can inspect their actual gear by clicking on their character and bringing up their paperdoll, then the only real problem is if you prefer a game where all the cards are always on the table(visible equipment, no ifs and/or buts) when you enter battle against someone, rather than having to weigh your options, take your time to inspect them and what they bring/wear before you attack.
Appearance slots/tabs would give a player the opportunity to travel basically incognito if they so wished(hooded cloaks/robes, gowns, rags) whereas only allowing optional permanent enhancements like dyes would still allow for some personal variety without actually changing the style/look of the gear being used.
ie. Imagine whole guilds going to battle wearing different styles of cloaks/gear(due to each player's prowess and acquisition of gear) but all dyed the same colour or using the same coat of arms added to them, compared to whole guilds going to battle all using appearance tabs to only openly display the players as wearing nothing but black robes. Which would be more imposing to you, those who are flaunting their prowess with visible gear, or those who are concealing it?
Personally, I love having the ability to travel incognito(love love loved my black hooded shroud in UO) but I do prefer the cards on the table approach when it comes to battle... at least for the other player.
Perhaps we could have dyes that could only be applied to non "end game" items (i.e. items that drop from the highest level group bosses, etc), so it would allow some level of customization, while still retaining the "cool" factor of "good" items having a specific look, etc.
"The surest way to corrupt a youth is to instruct him to hold in higher esteem those who think alike than those who think differently."
In your zeal to pin a label on someone you are misreading my point.
I have nothing against raiders. I have been a raider myself in many games. I did feel the need to speak out when someone suggested we are all inspired by raiders. That is a bit much.
What I mainly object to is people trying to prevent other gamers from wearing the armor skins they want - skins that in a game with no cash shop would be skins they earned - just so some other folks with better gear can stand out more. That to me is stupid and selfish.
If raid armor has a distinctive look, that's fine. Let them look however they want. Let them be as distinctive as they want. But they have no business trying to regulate everyone else's appearance choices.
If I get a cloak from a mob I kill whose armor appearance I really like, what harm is there in my continuing to use the appearance skin going forward? What business is it of yours? Who are you to try to interfere in how I dress myself for Pete's sake?
Post edited by Amathe on
EQ1, EQ2, SWG, SWTOR, GW, GW2 CoH, CoV, FFXI, WoW, CO, War,TSW and a slew of free trials and beta tests
What I mainly object to is people trying to prevent other gamers from wearing the armor skins they want - skins that in a game with no cash shop would be skins they earned - just so some other folks with better gear can stand out more. That to me is stupid and selfish.
If raid armor has a distinctive look, that's fine. Let them look however they want. Let them be as distinctive as they want. But they have no business trying to regulate everyone else's appearance choices.
If I get a cloak from a mob I kill whose armor appearance I really like, what harm is there in my continuing to use the appearance skin going forward? What business is it of yours? Who are you to try to interfere in how I dress myself for Pete's sake? How preternaturally small does someone's wee wee have to be to worry about whether their raid awesomeness will somehow be diminished by another player using gear skins?
They aren't regulating peoples appearances, in fact those who want appearance tabs are asking for special treatment themselves. In a game without appearance tabs, a player can wear whatever they is allowed for their class anyway. There is however the basic concept of gear progression, the natural and practical concept that as one advances through the content, so too will their gear.
What people are saying is that the game should create some "special" feature or rule that will allow the player to wear one item as a skin over the top of the item they are currently using so they can still gain the benefits of one, but the look of the other. The feature is counter to the games internal consistences and it kills a part of the game where the player is constantly seeking not only new gear, but for gear that appeals to them in looks.
I think what some are tired of is the "how I play" argument used as a trump card to validate any feature in the game. The fact is, as I pointed out, those wanting appearance tabs are asking for special treatment and it is catering to the mentality that the players individual desire is more important than that of the games systems and internal consistencies.
They aren't regulating peoples appearances, in fact those who want appearance tabs are asking for special treatment themselves. In a game without appearance tabs, a player can wear whatever they is allowed for their class anyway. There is however the basic concept of gear progression, the natural and practical concept that as one advances through the content, so too will their gear.
What people are saying is that the game should create some "special" feature or rule that will allow the player to wear one item as a skin over the top of the item they are currently using so they can still gain the benefits of one, but the look of the other. The feature is counter to the games internal consistences and it kills a part of the game where the player is constantly seeking not only new gear, but for gear that appeals to them in looks.
I think what some are tired of is the "how I play" argument used as a trump card to validate any feature in the game. The fact is, as I pointed out, those wanting appearance tabs are asking for special treatment and it is catering to the mentality that the players individual desire is more important than that of the games systems and internal consistencies.
Yeah and "some others" are tired of the hyperbole rhetoric based on "feeling" as some justification to force your own personal game play on others. First of all, this isnt a "special" feature, its actually pretty common in MMOs now. Unlike most of the newer features it doesnt actually affect the games systems or "immersion" when done correctly, nor does it "hand-hold" anyone for convenience.
Second, your entire argument is based on falsehoods. Not a single game that has ever had this feature has had any of this made up "internal consistency" problems youre trying to push. Better stats have always been the motivator for grabbing gear. Doesnt matter how fugly it is its the stats which give its "status" and popularity. Case in point there was a time when everyone wanted:
Youd have us wear this ugly junk for however long and hope the next set looks better? Somehow you want us to believe that if we can replace the look that we wont want the newer ones or even ones with a better stat allocation?
Just stop pretending like appearance gear will stop players from going for new gear. If they like the look, and the stats, they'll probably just wear it. If they dont, they will still get it for the stats and go for another "look" after. Your entire "doom" scenario is pulled out of thin air. Not only will there always be players who'd choose to look like a clown just to show off their epics your implication that appearance gear somehow kills any motivation for hunting other gear is based on nothing. If anything it actually improves it by giving players another category aside from "stats" to hunt for, even promoting one of the main tenets of Pantheon (community and interdependence) by giving old players a reason to participate in older content. Frankly I dont think even YOU can define these "internal consistencies" very well ...
Comments
No one (that I've seen) that is aganist appearance gear is asking for low to mid level gear to look ugly, rather, that gear retain its visual meaning by being recognizable and not watered down by weapon mods or armor skins. Raid gear could very well look the ugliest. Mid-level gear could have great graphics as well. That part is subjective anyhow.
If they put and appropriate amount of attention into this, there is no reason that the "looks" of a gear can't be quite the carrot in play following in the same spirit of risk vs reward as the rest of the game.
I think this has been discussed in the past but, what is the consensus on a basic /hidehelm function? Rather than talk about changing the skin of an item, what about hiding it completely?
I can see two sides:
Or
The developers decide what equipment has what stats, and effectively they create BIS items. If a player wants to not wear something for roleplaying/customization reasons, they put themselves at a disadvantage.
This is a PVE fantasy game. If it was a hyper-realistic medieval combat simulator like Kingdom Come: Deliverance, I could understand the desire to force these restrictions on players. But we have players running into battle carrying books that give them +12 INT. Even Aragorn heads into battle without a helmet on.
In "honest" realism arguments, it is a matter of practicality to the games world. An item being magical and establishing a given amount of protection or power is an internal aspect of the games world and is reasoned according to its relative design structure. So, such an item is "reasonable" in an internal evaluation of the worlds reality.
The problem with appearance tabs is they are an external element, not an internal one. There is no practical or reasonable existence for them within the games reality as they sit outside of it (much like the /loc command).
A practical and reasonable feature that is internal would be players being able to modify the looks of a given item through various means (dyes, tailoring, smiting, etc....). This is reasonable as it "fits" within the nature of the games world (I am not arguing for this, just giving it as an example of internal consistency).
Now certainly you can go out on a limb and declare the wildest of things to be "part of the lore/world", but then we get into the realms of a fantasy system being consistent or "believable" within its own reality. If it is poorly explained and implemented, it might as well be just a trump card to justify anything that is out of place. At that point, the fictional system fails as it has no rhyme or reason which is a major point of pulling someone into the game and making them "believe" the world.
Having an external appearance slot that somehow magically disappears peoples clothing making them appear as something else while at the same time retaining the value of item that disappeared has so many reality inconsistencies that it gets kind of silly.
As for Aragorn, sure... but is he wearing a helmet? Nope. You might have a point if he was wearing a helmet and it just didn't appear. People are free to go as Aragorn and not wear a helmet, and just like Aragorn, they will be unprotected on their head.
As for the books of intelligence. A tome of magical power that bestows upon the owner a magical clarity of thought? That is entirely consistent within the concept of a magical world as we often see in such games. The issue is not "real", it is "realism" and a book of such power is consistent in "realism" of such a magical world. Where we should have issues in these discussions is where the feature or contention in the world doesn't even fit its own fictional reality or... it is so poorly explained that it is an obvious issue.
So, the issue then becomes of the arguments on the "for appearance tabs", how can your feature be implemented in a way that respects the games reality, its "realism" while still attending to game play?
* No one is asking for clown outfits or tuxedos or any other crazyness
*It could be restricted to class specific gear, so no tanks wearing cloth vise verse
*Its optional so you don't even have to use it
*It could be limited to armor only no weapons
*Actually could add immersion in case the game doesn't have enough variety of gear, now we can look different, I would much rather have an epic set be original and not look like a clone of potentially hundreds of other toons
*Would add value to lower level gear, I remember when playing eqoa I sold a healer robe I believe that was special because of the color. It meant nothing to me since I had no idea the value. So I tossed it on the broker cheap and few minutes later got a tell from the buyer of its value.
Scumm made an excellent point in a previous post. Why is it ok to have hide helmet option, that is a very similar feature. I'm sure that will be in game so if no one complains about that why all the fuss over appearance tabs.
I've seen alot of opinions on why not to have it such as they want to see what the player has achieved, or want to be able to have a status on every ones achievements, or its silly and breaks immersion which I absolutely disagree with unless they put in clown suits which I know they wont. As far as status from gear, no ones stopping anyone if they want to prance around town showing how uber they are. I and I'm sure many others could care less, it's about the type of person you are not how good you are.
Now on the other hand if Pantheon was able to make such a large variety or armor / weapon graphics that gave plenty of options that peeps could actually live with I could see why we could live without appearance tabs. It's a tall task that not many mmo's have done well imo.
I see what you’re saying about the consistency of logic in a magical world, and I agree. I wasn’t suggesting that the magical tome was inconsistent. My point is that if we’re willing to believe that a Stein or Tome could have magical advantages, why can’t we believe that players could head into battle without a helmet on and be ok?
You’re right that appearance slots are an external element. That it requires a suspension of disbelief, even within the context of the game world. The problem is that we’re at the mercy of the designers. If they decide to make an item that is clearly the best to use, anyone who wishes to use a different item is at a disadvantage.
I’m not suggesting this, but here is a potential different path: Players loot ‘magical orbs’ that can imbue better stats to any armor they wish to augment. That way players get to wear what they like for their character, but not be at a disadvantage.
The reason I don’t like that idea is because it prevents iconic items from existing. The same could be said for dyeing or manipulating existing armor to look differently. They no longer look like the iconic item.
I don’t think of appearance slots as ‘magically disappearing’ clothing, I think of it as “This is what I WOULD be wearing if the developer-chosen stats didn’t put me at a disadvantage”. I would rather see this ‘unrealistic’ external solution than be forced to wear the same BIS that everyone else is wearing.This is just it though. If I think my character looks great with the plain black level 1 cloak, but I’ve just looted a Cloak of Flames that makes me look like I’m on fire, the desire to improve my ‘look’ was not the reason to obtain the better item.
Now consider people like my friend who go out and find their "look" and then never change out again. My friend was like that in EQ2. He found a couple of items he liked when he was level 2 and he looked the same at level 60. He had no desire to change his look, he was happy with it.
So, no carrot, no continued requirement of play. By looking like what you use, it drives the player to constantly seek out something they will be happy with and this becomes a circular process.
Well, I understand your point about BIS, but if Pantheon turns out with itemization that truly has BIS gear, then it has failed in its itemization. This goes for variety in gear as well. So the real solution is that they have a wide variety and a itemization system that isn't a rubber stamp that happens so often in games today.
That is part of the process though. You had a cool black cloak before, this new one doesn't go as well with your current setup, but in your pursuit of better gear, maybe that cloaks look now drives you to find a new look. A continued process of ever changing gear and looks. Part of game play is having something throw a hitch into your plans to which you then have to find another solution to.
There are other ways to deal with appearance though that respects the iconic look of an item, but allows for a change to "somewhat" customize it to a given taste. Also, if they design the items with respect to this issue, I think a lot of the problems that exist can be reduced to acceptable levels.
In the early days of games, where there were no appearance slots and itemization was more of a mix/match style of items, I personally had interest in my characters looks. That is, how my character looked was an element of pride and accomplishment and that was why I was interested.
As years went on and character looks became less about accomplishment, less about your efforts in game and more about cash stores, holiday gimmicks, etc... I stopped caring about my characters looks as it really had no meaning in game play.
This might be what peeps are worried about including myself, having faith in the graphic artists is a start.
From my point of view I get more immersed if my toon looks the part, I get that its part of the game to get to that point. Its just not as fun constantly having blue pants with orange chest or whatever. If the game solves that then should be fine.
Also still find it enticing to use older crafted or loot gear for appearance, holds value a little more that way.
The point is not to allow the original item to be modified too much, but... to allow for more unique customization. These "additions" could be drops and crafting items that could "accent" gear, but not take away its over all look.
A system like that combined with some effort to the variation of selections in the gear with some basic color symmetry to match themes and I think they could achieve an acceptable compromise for players who want the ability to be flexible in their appearance. This would keep in line with game play, uniqueness, and basic "realism" within the game itself.
I just don't understand this mentality. The only conclusion I can come to is it's pure jealousy. It's basically MMO socialism. You have to restrict the "rich" (or in this case, the people who have more time for whatever reason to invest into the MMO) from having good items... because of... yeah, that's right, jealousy that you don't have more time or can't invest more time into the game.
Nobody can have Porsche 911's because 90% of the population can't afford them, and clearly the only reason people buy them is so they can drive around lording them over all the poor peasants. Replace Porsche 911's with raid gear, and "peasents" with "casuals" and all of sudden you have the same argument, which I've seen made time and time again against "raiders" and "raiding". It's not that raiders actually enjoy the aspects of working together to achieve a goal, no, it's only that they want the phat lewtz so they can e-peen around all the casual filth.
I'm really getting tired of this mentality in the MMO community. The FOCUS of the game can be on grouping while still providing raiders with something to do and rewards that are in line with that activity. Focus doesn't mean to the exclusion of everything else.
Just like the game can focus on grouping and still provide soloer's with path's to progression. They may not be the most efficient paths compared to grouping. They may not provide the best rewards. But they can exist.
"The surest way to corrupt a youth is to instruct him to hold in higher esteem those who think alike than those who think differently."
- Friedrich Nietzsche
When Brad McQuaid and Kilsin come on here, or when they play Pantheon, they are working. The rest of us are just screwing around.
But that's not really the issue and I don't want to sidetrack the thread.
I didn't start a post complaining that the "haves" should have less, or be deprived of anything.
I do raise what I think is a valid issue of who the "haves" ought to be. It seems strange to make grouping the focus of the game and make the "haves" somebody else?
Others posted that the "have less" should not be allowed to make appearance armor choices that make their characters more fun for them to play. And that somehow, this would deprive the "haves" of the proper homage we are all supposed to pay them.
The jealousy you speak of seems more to me like people needing personal validation from their gaming.
I don't have to have the best things. I don't need to look the best. And if there are no skins, fine by me. I enjoyed gaming long before that was even invented.
Just so long as the game doesn't do anything stupidly punitive clothing-wise - so that a 100 folks or so on a server can feel special.
EQ1, EQ2, SWG, SWTOR, GW, GW2 CoH, CoV, FFXI, WoW, CO, War,TSW and a slew of free trials and beta tests
I can tell you that my ONLY peeve over the years is seeing Brad+++ whomever else was involved giving clerics plate armor,the same as a Tank.
If there is "reasoning" behind it ,they snubbed that reasoning by then giving the cleric less defense.I do not believe in those type of fake systems,your defense should simply be your armor and your agility/avoidance there should not be separate defense and "mitigation" ideas.
Then if we are assuming FANTASY we can accept as plausible magical gear.That should of course me more valuable as well as open the door to more depth in your combat to which SOE/Brad +++ and company have never done much to enhance.
There is a long long list of stuff i really like about this game,all done the way i like to see it done but there are still many areas that scare me about Brad's vision for game design.Well not so much scare me but will not be in line with the other plausible ideas,example one VERY important one is altaholic gaming,just wrong wrong wrong.
Never forget 3 mile Island and never trust a government official or company spokesman.
I also enjoyed the idea (at least in FFXI) that i could see someones high end gear and check them right away because i wanted to know what BA piece they had (like relic weapons) i also liked the fact that you could generally tell what class they were when you looked at them, even classes that used multiple weapons.
You are setting up a straw man. Nobody (or almost nobody) is pretending its work. But every hobby has opportunity costs. If you want to become a competitive chess player, you have to invest a lot of time in it. If you want to be a competitive downhill skier, you have to invest time into it. Many times this comes at the detriment of your other hobbies or desires.
I get where you are coming from, and certainly some people DO treat MMO's as work. But trying to white wash raiders that way is disingenuous. I also apologize, I didn't mean to imply any of that to you personally, I don't really know you or your desires as far as gaming. I'm just saying that there is large, and I do mean large, faction of the MMO playerbase who literally view raiders as the worst scum on the planet, and unfortunately they're such a large group that they've been able to shape developers and MMOs so their will, and are one of if not the primary reason we have a bunch of on rails, solo quest hub faceroll easy mmos.
At the end of the day, if some neckbeard basement dweller that has no job or responsibilities, elects to spend 18 hours a day 7 days a week playing the game, and gets some super rare super badass item... does it REALLY affect you? Really?
I constantly remember the arguments people made along the lines of "I pay $15 a month and I should get to see everything the game has to offer for that!", which basically translated to "all the content needs to cater to my inability to play more than 30-40 minutes 2 or 3 times a week, and if there is any content that requires more effort than that, then I am being cheated out of my money." I tried to explain to these people its like paying a gym membership. You are paying for access to the gym (or content in this case), you're not paying for a 6 pack of abs, or for 22" biceps. You have to put in effort to get those. Everything in life has opportunity costs.
This is why I say its just pure jealousy. You interpret people who think the idea of seeing some guy run by with a super rare item and being able to identify it via looks as that person requiring people to "pay homage" to them. While that does happen, the reality is the more often occurrence is that people see them run by and say "cool man, one day I'd like to have that item!". Too many have this mentality that if someone has something nice, that it means they must have either stepped on the heads of someone to get it, or that they stole it from someone.
People like "earning" things, even if those things are pixels on a screen. It gives people joy and happiness. Do some people do things for the wrong reasons. Obviously. But you don't create policies that detract from the majority to police the few when they are victimless "crimes".
"The surest way to corrupt a youth is to instruct him to hold in higher esteem those who think alike than those who think differently."
- Friedrich Nietzsche
Appearance slots/tabs would give a player the opportunity to travel basically incognito if they so wished(hooded cloaks/robes, gowns, rags) whereas only allowing optional permanent enhancements like dyes would still allow for some personal variety without actually changing the style/look of the gear being used.
ie. Imagine whole guilds going to battle wearing different styles of cloaks/gear(due to each player's prowess and acquisition of gear) but all dyed the same colour or using the same coat of arms added to them, compared to whole guilds going to battle all using appearance tabs to only openly display the players as wearing nothing but black robes. Which would be more imposing to you, those who are flaunting their prowess with visible gear, or those who are concealing it?
Personally, I love having the ability to travel incognito(love love loved my black hooded shroud in UO) but I do prefer the cards on the table approach when it comes to battle... at least for the other player.
"The surest way to corrupt a youth is to instruct him to hold in higher esteem those who think alike than those who think differently."
- Friedrich Nietzsche
In your zeal to pin a label on someone you are misreading my point.
I have nothing against raiders. I have been a raider myself in many games. I did feel the need to speak out when someone suggested we are all inspired by raiders. That is a bit much.
What I mainly object to is people trying to prevent other gamers from wearing the armor skins they want - skins that in a game with no cash shop would be skins they earned - just so some other folks with better gear can stand out more. That to me is stupid and selfish.
If raid armor has a distinctive look, that's fine. Let them look however they want. Let them be as distinctive as they want. But they have no business trying to regulate everyone else's appearance choices.
If I get a cloak from a mob I kill whose armor appearance I really like, what harm is there in my continuing to use the appearance skin going forward? What business is it of yours? Who are you to try to interfere in how I dress myself for Pete's sake?
EQ1, EQ2, SWG, SWTOR, GW, GW2 CoH, CoV, FFXI, WoW, CO, War,TSW and a slew of free trials and beta tests
They aren't regulating peoples appearances, in fact those who want appearance tabs are asking for special treatment themselves. In a game without appearance tabs, a player can wear whatever they is allowed for their class anyway. There is however the basic concept of gear progression, the natural and practical concept that as one advances through the content, so too will their gear.
What people are saying is that the game should create some "special" feature or rule that will allow the player to wear one item as a skin over the top of the item they are currently using so they can still gain the benefits of one, but the look of the other. The feature is counter to the games internal consistences and it kills a part of the game where the player is constantly seeking not only new gear, but for gear that appeals to them in looks.
I think what some are tired of is the "how I play" argument used as a trump card to validate any feature in the game. The fact is, as I pointed out, those wanting appearance tabs are asking for special treatment and it is catering to the mentality that the players individual desire is more important than that of the games systems and internal consistencies.
Second, your entire argument is based on falsehoods. Not a single game that has ever had this feature has had any of this made up "internal consistency" problems youre trying to push. Better stats have always been the motivator for grabbing gear. Doesnt matter how fugly it is its the stats which give its "status" and popularity. Case in point there was a time when everyone wanted:
Youd have us wear this ugly junk for however long and hope the next set looks better? Somehow you want us to believe that if we can replace the look that we wont want the newer ones or even ones with a better stat allocation?
Just stop pretending like appearance gear will stop players from going for new gear. If they like the look, and the stats, they'll probably just wear it. If they dont, they will still get it for the stats and go for another "look" after. Your entire "doom" scenario is pulled out of thin air. Not only will there always be players who'd choose to look like a clown just to show off their epics your implication that appearance gear somehow kills any motivation for hunting other gear is based on nothing. If anything it actually improves it by giving players another category aside from "stats" to hunt for, even promoting one of the main tenets of Pantheon (community and interdependence) by giving old players a reason to participate in older content. Frankly I dont think even YOU can define these "internal consistencies" very well ...