It was absolutely a thing on Everquest too as I myself reported several obnoxious names and they were changed.
I remember one instance very clearly it was a half elf with some 'pussy' or 'cunt' in her name in Freeport and a level one toon. We all complained and GM came and changed it.
There is a difference between naming your character cockgobbler and crazyjellydonut I am arguing for the latter and as VEHEMENTLY against the former. Stop conflating the two.
It was absolutely a thing on Everquest too as I myself reported several obnoxious names and they were changed.
I remember one instance very clearly it was a half elf with some 'pussy' or 'cunt' in her name in Freeport and a level one toon. We all complained and GM came and changed it.
There is a difference between naming your character cockgobbler and crazyjellydonut I am arguing for the latter and as VEHEMENTLY against the former. Stop conflating the two.
Unfortunately without a naming rule those names can be arguably allowed. Without a naming convention and discretion that comes with it which you seem to be arguing against the names that even you find objectionable will be allowable.
Why is it that people who have an untenable position always make themselves out to be the victim? Is it easier for them to make their points about their untenable position and while insulting the developer and then still get the pity and commiseration.
Look the rule is clear deal with it. I mean especially because you're advocating rubbish names and trying to make it sound like that is not what you're advocating. Like you really care about the discussion. Leave this poor beleaguered developer alone for god's sake and let him get on to more important things then your reasons for names like 'koksyucker'.
Now your being deliberatly disingenuous. I have stated REPEATEDLY sexual or racist names shouldn’t be allowed. “Poor beleaguered dev” he’s presenting a product I stated my concerns with said product and tried to ask questions on it. He’s also presenting it through a news outlet with an open forum. Kinda like when apple removed headphone jack and got criticized for it. The only thing I’ve gone after the developer for is his poor PR and rude behavior.
I’ve gotten in response is “it’s the rule your opinion doesn’t matter” and people attacking my character by misrepresenting me like you have just now. I’m advocating for player choice which should always be a thing as long as it doesn’t directly inhibit your ability to play, antagonize or harass, or give them an unfair advantage. If someone finds joy in goofy names such as dirtydan papapete hydrogen why should they not be allowed?
In your words: "I’m advocating for player choice which should always be a thing as long as it doesn’t directly inhibit your ability to play, antagonize or harass, or give them an unfair advantage. If someone finds joy in goofy names such as dirtydan papapete hydrogen why should they not be allowed?"
You answered your own question in the first part of the quoted section where you mention "inhibit, antagonize or harass".
Non-fantasy name selection directly inhibits, antagonizes, and harasses players who are there to indulge in a fantasy roleplaying game (note the RP in MMORPG stands for roleplaying).
While you may find names such as "dirtydan", "papapete", or "hydrogen" to be goofy, those who prefer their roleplay environments free of such sillyness view those types of names to be infringing upon their gameplay environment.
Thus, such names are inhibiting to the fun of roleplayers, antagonizing those roleplayers, and harassing by their very nature. They may not be as "offensive" or "vulgar" as other names, but they are nevertheless infringing upon the roleplay environment of the server.
It was absolutely a thing on Everquest too as I myself reported several obnoxious names and they were changed.
I remember one instance very clearly it was a half elf with some 'pussy' or 'cunt' in her name in Freeport and a level one toon. We all complained and GM came and changed it.
There is a difference between naming your character cockgobbler and crazyjellydonut I am arguing for the latter and as VEHEMENTLY against the former. Stop conflating the two.
Unfortunately without a naming rule those names can be arguably allowed. Without a naming convention and discretion that comes with it which you seem to be arguing against the names that even you find objectionable will be allowable.
I never said no naming rules again I feel like you failed to read my previous statements. Naming rules should prohibit overtly or blatantly sexual or racist names or connotations. Wow how hard was that
They should also be in line with the type of game we are playing . The name should fit the world too otherwise why are we playing a roleplaying game.
It is absolutely within the developer's right to preserve and maintain the world he is creating and that includes naming conventions. People like you who just want to disrupt the world and atmosphere cannot appreciate this fact but creators do treasure their creations and will want to cherish their creations and I think names are very important as they stay with you and something that identifies the player. If the player cannot respect this simple rule perhaps that player is not suited for the roleplaying game in question.
Also comparing rules in a game game to the no shirt no shoes or the speed limit is ridiculous. Speed limit keeps you and other drivers safe. Right to deny service is at the discretion of the business.
In our case, our "speed limit" is our naming policy. It keeps our community members safe from folks who want to "drive fast and loose" with their names. It's our "no shirt, no shoes, no service" policy that makes sure our community members can enjoy their meal without dealing with elements that take them away from that enjoyment.
Also, the last part of your comment is the first time we've ever agreed on anything.
The right to deny service is at the discretion of the business.
You couldn't be more correct.
And we’re back to the beginning. Yes you absolutely have that right. Your just using that right to deny people who play mmorpgs differently than you.
There had always been a min maxing gameplay oriented crowd. Since before mmos had graphics. Your examples have either been rules taken out of context such as with eq and eq2. Or rp servers. The thing with to servers is you opt into them. You aren’t providing that option and clearly aren’t willing to.
It’s like you start a company to sell high quality computer cases but the only color available is off beige and if you don’t like it we don’t want your business.
Laurelin, that's the one I was thinking of. I spent about three years on that server, and remember the naming brigades quite fondly. Kept the atmosphere very Tolkien/fantasy.
Wasn't aware the naming policies were still being enforced. Good to know!
Yep, still in effect, the character name of a kinmate's new alt was changed maybe 3 months ago on Laurelin.
I wouldn't say enforced per se, it is a very friendly process no trolling in chat, no name calling, etc. The player just finds the character renamed, with a nice letter attached about something like sorry your character's name was changed, you can rename him for free, but please choose a lore-appropriate name next time while on this server, thanks a lot.
It was absolutely a thing on Everquest too as I myself reported several obnoxious names and they were changed.
I remember one instance very clearly it was a half elf with some 'pussy' or 'cunt' in her name in Freeport and a level one toon. We all complained and GM came and changed it.
There is a difference between naming your character cockgobbler and crazyjellydonut I am arguing for the latter and as VEHEMENTLY against the former. Stop conflating the two.
Within the context of the intent of their naming policy there is no difference at all.
The policy isn't meant to only apply to names that could be seen as improper in general, but also to names that would undermine the verisimilitude of their gaming environment.
They feel both to be improper for their game, and will allow neither.
It is their right to do so, just as it is your right to seek out a game where crazyjellydonut is considered an acceptable name by those operating it.
Laurelin, that's the one I was thinking of. I spent about three years on that server, and remember the naming brigades quite fondly. Kept the atmosphere very Tolkien/fantasy.
Wasn't aware the naming policies were still being enforced. Good to know!
Yep, still in effect, the character name of a kinmate's new alt was changed maybe 3 months ago on Laurelin.
I wouldn't say enforced per se, it is a very friendly process no trolling in chat, no name calling, etc. The player just finds the character renamed, with a nice letter attached about something like sorry your character's name was changed, you can rename him for free, but please choose a lore-appropriate name next time while on this server, thanks a lot.
Why is it that people who have an untenable position always make themselves out to be the victim? Is it easier for them to make their points about their untenable position and while insulting the developer and then still get the pity and commiseration.
Look the rule is clear deal with it. I mean especially because you're advocating rubbish names and trying to make it sound like that is not what you're advocating. Like you really care about the discussion. Leave this poor beleaguered developer alone for god's sake and let him get on to more important things then your reasons for names like 'koksyucker'.
Now your being deliberatly disingenuous. I have stated REPEATEDLY sexual or racist names shouldn’t be allowed. “Poor beleaguered dev” he’s presenting a product I stated my concerns with said product and tried to ask questions on it. He’s also presenting it through a news outlet with an open forum. Kinda like when apple removed headphone jack and got criticized for it. The only thing I’ve gone after the developer for is his poor PR and rude behavior.
I’ve gotten in response is “it’s the rule your opinion doesn’t matter” and people attacking my character by misrepresenting me like you have just now. I’m advocating for player choice which should always be a thing as long as it doesn’t directly inhibit your ability to play, antagonize or harass, or give them an unfair advantage. If someone finds joy in goofy names such as dirtydan papapete hydrogen why should they not be allowed?
In your words: "I’m advocating for player choice which should always be a thing as long as it doesn’t directly inhibit your ability to play, antagonize or harass, or give them an unfair advantage. If someone finds joy in goofy names such as dirtydan papapete hydrogen why should they not be allowed?"
You answered your own question in the first part of the quoted section where you mention "inhibit, antagonize or harass".
Non-fantasy name selection directly inhibits, antagonizes, and harasses players who are there to indulge in a fantasy roleplaying game (note the RP in MMORPG stands for roleplaying).
While you may find names such as "dirtydan", "papapete", or "hydrogen" to be goofy, those who prefer their roleplay environments free of such sillyness view those types of names to be infringing upon their gameplay environment.
Thus, such names are inhibiting to the fun of roleplayers, antagonizing those roleplayers, and harassing by their very nature. They may not be as "offensive" or "vulgar" as other names, but they are nevertheless infringing upon the roleplay environment of the server.
Well that’s all there is to it then. I disagree with the implementation and reasoning but if that’s the crowd you want to appeal to go for it. I’ve read more about the game and it genuinely looks fun good luck to you. But the hardcore rp is a turnoff for me.
A response, such as the one above, from the start. This came off as much less dismissive and addressed my points and concerns.
Dude one of the most well known players was tig’ol. One of his guild mates was popcorncaster. I have never heard of people getting force named changes in eq1 unless it was a real persons name, sexual or racist.
While you may find names such as "dirtydan", "papapete", or "hydrogen" to be goofy, those who prefer their roleplay environments free of such sillyness view those types of names to be infringing upon their gameplay environment.
Thus, such names are inhibiting to the fun of roleplayers, antagonizing those roleplayers, and harassing by their very nature. They may not be as "offensive" or "vulgar" as other names, but they are nevertheless infringing upon the roleplay environment of the server.
Interesting...
Perhaps "DirtyDan" was given that nickname by his barracks mates when he served in the King's army back in '82 and it stuck? Or maybe he was tagged with the name because he was a bandit at some point.
Perhaps "PapaPete" uses that moniker because it reminds him of his step-daughter who died in the plague 12 years back. Or maybe he comes from a small village and his son is also named Pete. So all the locals called them Pete and PapaPete to keep them separate.
As for Hydrogen... is that any less believable for a fantasy world name than "Karok" or "Jorium"? Or some other made up word/name?
It's your ballgame and you get to set the rules, but I think it's small minded to assume that names like "DirtyDan" or "PapaPete" could have no legitimate RP aspect...
All time classic MY NEW FAVORITE POST! (Keep laying those bricks)
"I should point out that no other company has shipped out a beta on a disc before this." - Official Mortal Online Lead Community Moderator
Proudly wearing the Harbinger badge since Dec 23, 2017.
Coined the phrase "Role-Playing a Development Team" January 2018
"Oddly Slap is the main reason I stay in these forums." - Mystichaze April 9th 2018
All this discussion over a game that if it ever launches will most likely have less players than posts in this thread.
Epic.
As for naming polocies.. I've only ran into them in strict rp servers. On regular servers dating back to uo until now I've only seen offensive names changed.
For the actual topic (even though it seems the topic is naming policies ), I agree on the statement Suzie quoted from the original Monday post. Sure I agree, I used to say the same since years...
If a game is good (or fun&immersive as the post says), it doesn't matter what the payment model is, I play it. Nice to know that according to BI and Statista I'm not alone in this.
The other interpretations of that same situation are also true (for me, at least), if a game is bad, I won't play it regardless of the payment model. And payment model doesn't define quality, no such thing as "f2p means bad game, sub means good game".
About the hybrids, I think it's the best solution... as I used to say, option is king. Forced <anything> is not only bad in relation of gameplay, on the current market and era I believe mandatory subscription is more the exception than the rule. It works -somewhat- in older games with set playerbase, but for a new game it might be a wrong choice - and as you say as well, both Wow and FF XIV: ARR has now f2p parts and elements too.
The best feature of a hybrid model is its flexibility. Not just for the players, but for the dev side too. You can decide where to put the emphasis within the model, it can be a subscription-heavy design like SWTOR, a f2p-heavy design like STO was for example (so much so that they entirely removed the subscription from the options this year), or a balanced design like LotRO. Each has its advantages and disadvantages though, so it depends on the setup of the game's mechanics as well.
Dude one of the most well known players was tig’ol. One of his guild mates was popcorncaster. I have never heard of people getting force named changes in eq1 unless it was a real persons name, sexual or racist.
I had a forced name change in EQ because the name of the character very slightly resemble a product name that I had never heard of and had to do a google search to even find out what it was. It was a wizard named Chewiz and they though that was too close to cheez whiz I think.
Funny thing was that I then did searches on my other characters names and my main one was the name of a character in a book series and another was the same as the name of a pharmaceutical company. They never had any problems with the names.
Going back to the pay model, can you really please everyone using every pay model? I find that when MMOs have tried that it seems to not work very well.
Going back to the pay model, can you really please everyone using every pay model? I find that when MMOs have tried that it seems to not work very well.
Pay models need to be part of the game design. Just slapping a random payment model onto a game not designed with it in mind is just inviting disaster.
All time classic MY NEW FAVORITE POST! (Keep laying those bricks)
"I should point out that no other company has shipped out a beta on a disc before this." - Official Mortal Online Lead Community Moderator
Proudly wearing the Harbinger badge since Dec 23, 2017.
Coined the phrase "Role-Playing a Development Team" January 2018
"Oddly Slap is the main reason I stay in these forums." - Mystichaze April 9th 2018
With the exception of the Mondays In MMORPG episode on Group-Based Gameplay, 100% of your links are posts back from 2015.
Those posts were from 3+ years ago. Similarly, the MMORPG.com page for our game had/has information from 3+ years ago. We've updated a LOT of things since then.
Thankfully, the MMORPG staff seem to be working on it (based on the emails I've received today after the hoopalooza surrounding this post), so hopefully we should be able to get some better information out there to the public who prefer coming here for their information, as opposed to directly to our website (where our FAQ page has regular updates to keep folks up to speed).
Now, in regards to the Group-Based Gameplay post, let's not cherry-pick your quotes. Instead, let's talk about the WHOLE article, which revolves around this core aspect:
“It’s the tabletop scenario. Friends hanging out, socializing, overcoming overwhelming odds together, and ultimately experiencing a sense of accomplishment that can only happen when you achieve a goal alongside someone else, rather than on your own.”
That's not to say you can't do things on your own. But rather our preferred method of gameplay is group-based, and while you can do things on your own like in early Everquest, the majority of our gameplay is going to be for community-based players who enjoy grouping.
How do you go from a statement as strong as "... this is a game for groups, not hacks who want to use loopholes to get around intended mechanics." to your seemingly more solo-inclusive statements you're making today?
I'm having a hard time believing that your recent more welcoming attitude towards solo play is anything other than just marketing PR spin in order to attract those who would have been totally turned off by your aggressively anti-solo 2015 statement.
Not that there is anything wrong with making a must group MMO... as long as you're crystal clear that this is what you're making. As clear as you were in 2015.
"Social media gives legions of idiots the right to speak when they once only spoke at a bar after a glass of wine, without harming the community ... but now they have the same right to speak as a Nobel Prize winner. It's the invasion of the idiots”
― Umberto Eco
“Microtransactions? In a single player role-playing game? Are you nuts?” ― CD PROJEKT RED
With the exception of the Mondays In MMORPG episode on Group-Based Gameplay, 100% of your links are posts back from 2015.
Those posts were from 3+ years ago. Similarly, the MMORPG.com page for our game had/has information from 3+ years ago. We've updated a LOT of things since then.
Thankfully, the MMORPG staff seem to be working on it (based on the emails I've received today after the hoopalooza surrounding this post), so hopefully we should be able to get some better information out there to the public who prefer coming here for their information, as opposed to directly to our website (where our FAQ page has regular updates to keep folks up to speed).
Now, in regards to the Group-Based Gameplay post, let's not cherry-pick your quotes. Instead, let's talk about the WHOLE article, which revolves around this core aspect:
“It’s the tabletop scenario. Friends hanging out, socializing, overcoming overwhelming odds together, and ultimately experiencing a sense of accomplishment that can only happen when you achieve a goal alongside someone else, rather than on your own.”
That's not to say you can't do things on your own. But rather our preferred method of gameplay is group-based, and while you can do things on your own like in early Everquest, the majority of our gameplay is going to be for community-based players who enjoy grouping.
How do you go from a statement as strong as "... this is a game for groups, not hacks who want to use loopholes to get around intended mechanics." to your seemingly more solo-inclusive statements you're making today?
I'm having a hard time believing that your recent more welcoming attitude towards solo play is anything other than just marketing PR spin in order to attract those who would have been totally turned off by your aggressively anti-solo 2015 statement.
Not that there is anything wrong with making a must group MMO... as long as you're crystal clear that this is what you're making. As clear as you were in 2015.
/shrug
We're allowed to shift design in whichever direction we choose. In this case we've backed off our rhetoric of "no solo" (which was confusing players), to our current, much clearer wording of:
Think early EverQuest. You can head out, harvest a few things, craft a bit, kill a few mobs close to town within the safety of the guards if you need to run, but if you want to hit up Orc Hill you’ll need 3-4 other players, and if you want to head into Crushbone and handle the Throne Room, you’ll need a full group. You need a well-balanced group of adventurers to handle whatever you might come across in the wild. You need gear. You need supplies. Bandages. Potions. Scrolls. A pack mule. Rope. Never leave home without a good length of rope.
Going back to the pay model, can you really please everyone using every pay model? I find that when MMOs have tried that it seems to not work very well.
Pay models need to be part of the game design. Just slapping a random payment model onto a game not designed with it in mind is just inviting disaster.
We've always known we were going with a subscription, and our game mechanics and design are focused around that concept (no cash shop, for example; everything must be earned by a player actually playing the game).
That being said, we'd be idiots if we didn't at least research all the various methods. We've consulted with a number of developers in the industry leading up to where we are today, helping us iron out the kinks and see what things they wish they had not done while chasing the cash wagon.
Just throwing out a cash shop/etc. randomly is design disaster. The game needs to be designed around whatever payment method you are going to use, 100%.
With the exception of the Mondays In MMORPG episode on Group-Based Gameplay, 100% of your links are posts back from 2015.
Those posts were from 3+ years ago. Similarly, the MMORPG.com page for our game had/has information from 3+ years ago. We've updated a LOT of things since then.
Thankfully, the MMORPG staff seem to be working on it (based on the emails I've received today after the hoopalooza surrounding this post), so hopefully we should be able to get some better information out there to the public who prefer coming here for their information, as opposed to directly to our website (where our FAQ page has regular updates to keep folks up to speed).
Now, in regards to the Group-Based Gameplay post, let's not cherry-pick your quotes. Instead, let's talk about the WHOLE article, which revolves around this core aspect:
“It’s the tabletop scenario. Friends hanging out, socializing, overcoming overwhelming odds together, and ultimately experiencing a sense of accomplishment that can only happen when you achieve a goal alongside someone else, rather than on your own.”
That's not to say you can't do things on your own. But rather our preferred method of gameplay is group-based, and while you can do things on your own like in early Everquest, the majority of our gameplay is going to be for community-based players who enjoy grouping.
How do you go from a statement as strong as "... this is a game for groups, not hacks who want to use loopholes to get around intended mechanics." to your seemingly more solo-inclusive statements you're making today?
I'm having a hard time believing that your recent more welcoming attitude towards solo play is anything other than just marketing PR spin in order to attract those who would have been totally turned off by your aggressively anti-solo 2015 statement.
Not that there is anything wrong with making a must group MMO... as long as you're crystal clear that this is what you're making. As clear as you were in 2015.
/shrug
We're allowed to shift design in whichever direction we choose.
Of course you are. But my question is more have you in fact shifted design to include solo play or are you just using less aggressive language to describe the same game with the same mechanics you were describing in 2015?
If you have, what are those solo-centric design changes you have made?
"Social media gives legions of idiots the right to speak when they once only spoke at a bar after a glass of wine, without harming the community ... but now they have the same right to speak as a Nobel Prize winner. It's the invasion of the idiots”
― Umberto Eco
“Microtransactions? In a single player role-playing game? Are you nuts?” ― CD PROJEKT RED
With the exception of the Mondays In MMORPG episode on Group-Based Gameplay, 100% of your links are posts back from 2015.
Those posts were from 3+ years ago. Similarly, the MMORPG.com page for our game had/has information from 3+ years ago. We've updated a LOT of things since then.
Thankfully, the MMORPG staff seem to be working on it (based on the emails I've received today after the hoopalooza surrounding this post), so hopefully we should be able to get some better information out there to the public who prefer coming here for their information, as opposed to directly to our website (where our FAQ page has regular updates to keep folks up to speed).
Now, in regards to the Group-Based Gameplay post, let's not cherry-pick your quotes. Instead, let's talk about the WHOLE article, which revolves around this core aspect:
“It’s the tabletop scenario. Friends hanging out, socializing, overcoming overwhelming odds together, and ultimately experiencing a sense of accomplishment that can only happen when you achieve a goal alongside someone else, rather than on your own.”
That's not to say you can't do things on your own. But rather our preferred method of gameplay is group-based, and while you can do things on your own like in early Everquest, the majority of our gameplay is going to be for community-based players who enjoy grouping.
How do you go from a statement as strong as "... this is a game for groups, not hacks who want to use loopholes to get around intended mechanics." to your seemingly more solo-inclusive statements you're making today?
I'm having a hard time believing that your recent more welcoming attitude towards solo play is anything other than just marketing PR spin in order to attract those who would have been totally turned off by your aggressively anti-solo 2015 statement.
Not that there is anything wrong with making a must group MMO... as long as you're crystal clear that this is what you're making. As clear as you were in 2015.
/shrug
We're allowed to shift design in whichever direction we choose.
Of course you are. But my question is more have you in fact shifted design to include solo play or are you just using less aggressive language to describe the same game with the same mechanics you were describing in 2015?
If you have, what are those solo-centric design changes you have made?
Using less aggressive language to describe the same game, more or less. We've always anticipated things close to town being solo-able, but I'd say 85% of the game (or more) is designed for groups.
It's early EQ (I edited my above comment), essentially:
(From our FAQ page): Think early EverQuest. You can head out, harvest a few things, craft a bit, kill a few mobs close to town within the safety of the guards if you need to run, but if you want to hit up Orc Hill you’ll need 3-4 other players, and if you want to head into Crushbone and handle the Throne Room, you’ll need a full group. You need a well-balanced group of adventurers to handle whatever you might come across in the wild. You need gear. You need supplies. Bandages. Potions. Scrolls. A pack mule. Rope. Never leave home without a good length of rope.
Comments
In your words: "I’m advocating for player choice which should always be a thing as long as it doesn’t directly inhibit your ability to play, antagonize or harass, or give them an unfair advantage. If someone finds joy in goofy names such as dirtydan papapete hydrogen why should they not be allowed?"
You answered your own question in the first part of the quoted section where you mention "inhibit, antagonize or harass".
Non-fantasy name selection directly inhibits, antagonizes, and harasses players who are there to indulge in a fantasy roleplaying game (note the RP in MMORPG stands for roleplaying).
While you may find names such as "dirtydan", "papapete", or "hydrogen" to be goofy, those who prefer their roleplay environments free of such sillyness view those types of names to be infringing upon their gameplay environment.
Thus, such names are inhibiting to the fun of roleplayers, antagonizing those roleplayers, and harassing by their very nature. They may not be as "offensive" or "vulgar" as other names, but they are nevertheless infringing upon the roleplay environment of the server.
It is absolutely within the developer's right to preserve and maintain the world he is creating and that includes naming conventions. People like you who just want to disrupt the world and atmosphere cannot appreciate this fact but creators do treasure their creations and will want to cherish their creations and I think names are very important as they stay with you and something that identifies the player. If the player cannot respect this simple rule perhaps that player is not suited for the roleplaying game in question.
There had always been a min maxing gameplay oriented crowd. Since before mmos had graphics. Your examples have either been rules taken out of context such as with eq and eq2. Or rp servers. The thing with to servers is you opt into them. You aren’t providing that option and clearly aren’t willing to.
It’s like you start a company to sell high quality computer cases but the only color available is off beige and if you don’t like it we don’t want your business.
I wouldn't say enforced per se, it is a very friendly process
sorry your character's name was changed, you can rename him for free, but please choose a lore-appropriate name next time while on this server, thanks a lot.
And that's just an extra layer (specifically for those two servers) on top of the default naming policy which is in effect on all servers.
Not to mention, violating those more general rules doesn't give a free name change, according to https://help.standingstonegames.com/hc/en-us/articles/115002544087-LOTRO-Naming-Policy
Perhaps "DirtyDan" was given that nickname by his barracks mates when he served in the King's army back in '82 and it stuck? Or maybe he was tagged with the name because he was a bandit at some point.
Perhaps "PapaPete" uses that moniker because it reminds him of his step-daughter who died in the plague 12 years back. Or maybe he comes from a small village and his son is also named Pete. So all the locals called them Pete and PapaPete to keep them separate.
As for Hydrogen... is that any less believable for a fantasy world name than "Karok" or "Jorium"? Or some other made up word/name?
It's your ballgame and you get to set the rules, but I think it's small minded to assume that names like "DirtyDan" or "PapaPete" could have no legitimate RP aspect...
All time classic MY NEW FAVORITE POST! (Keep laying those bricks)
"I should point out that no other company has shipped out a beta on a disc before this." - Official Mortal Online Lead Community Moderator
Proudly wearing the Harbinger badge since Dec 23, 2017.
Coined the phrase "Role-Playing a Development Team" January 2018
"Oddly Slap is the main reason I stay in these forums." - Mystichaze April 9th 2018
As for naming polocies.. I've only ran into them in strict rp servers. On regular servers dating back to uo until now I've only seen offensive names changed.
If a game is good (or fun&immersive as the post says), it doesn't matter what the payment model is, I play it. Nice to know that according to BI and Statista I'm not alone in this.
The other interpretations of that same situation are also true (for me, at least), if a game is bad, I won't play it regardless of the payment model. And payment model doesn't define quality, no such thing as "f2p means bad game, sub means good game".
About the hybrids, I think it's the best solution... as I used to say, option is king. Forced <anything> is not only bad in relation of gameplay, on the current market and era I believe mandatory subscription is more the exception than the rule. It works -somewhat- in older games with set playerbase, but for a new game it might be a wrong choice - and as you say as well, both Wow and FF XIV: ARR has now f2p parts and elements too.
The best feature of a hybrid model is its flexibility. Not just for the players, but for the dev side too. You can decide where to put the emphasis within the model, it can be a subscription-heavy design like SWTOR, a f2p-heavy design like STO was for example (so much so that they entirely removed the subscription from the options this year), or a balanced design like LotRO.
Each has its advantages and disadvantages though, so it depends on the setup of the game's mechanics as well.
Funny thing was that I then did searches on my other characters names and my main one was the name of a character in a book series and another was the same as the name of a pharmaceutical
company. They never had any problems with the names.
All time classic MY NEW FAVORITE POST! (Keep laying those bricks)
"I should point out that no other company has shipped out a beta on a disc before this." - Official Mortal Online Lead Community Moderator
Proudly wearing the Harbinger badge since Dec 23, 2017.
Coined the phrase "Role-Playing a Development Team" January 2018
"Oddly Slap is the main reason I stay in these forums." - Mystichaze April 9th 2018
I'm having a hard time believing that your recent more welcoming attitude towards solo play is anything other than just marketing PR spin in order to attract those who would have been totally turned off by your aggressively anti-solo 2015 statement.
Not that there is anything wrong with making a must group MMO... as long as you're crystal clear that this is what you're making. As clear as you were in 2015.
“Microtransactions? In a single player role-playing game? Are you nuts?”
― CD PROJEKT RED
We're allowed to shift design in whichever direction we choose. In this case we've backed off our rhetoric of "no solo" (which was confusing players), to our current, much clearer wording of:
Think early EverQuest. You can head out, harvest a few things, craft a bit, kill a few mobs close to town within the safety of the guards if you need to run, but if you want to hit up Orc Hill you’ll need 3-4 other players, and if you want to head into Crushbone and handle the Throne Room, you’ll need a full group. You need a well-balanced group of adventurers to handle whatever you might come across in the wild. You need gear. You need supplies. Bandages. Potions. Scrolls. A pack mule. Rope. Never leave home without a good length of rope.
We've always known we were going with a subscription, and our game mechanics and design are focused around that concept (no cash shop, for example; everything must be earned by a player actually playing the game).
That being said, we'd be idiots if we didn't at least research all the various methods. We've consulted with a number of developers in the industry leading up to where we are today, helping us iron out the kinks and see what things they wish they had not done while chasing the cash wagon.
Just throwing out a cash shop/etc. randomly is design disaster. The game needs to be designed around whatever payment method you are going to use, 100%.
If you have, what are those solo-centric design changes you have made?
“Microtransactions? In a single player role-playing game? Are you nuts?”
― CD PROJEKT RED
Using less aggressive language to describe the same game, more or less. We've always anticipated things close to town being solo-able, but I'd say 85% of the game (or more) is designed for groups.
It's early EQ (I edited my above comment), essentially:
(From our FAQ page): Think early EverQuest. You can head out, harvest a few things, craft a bit, kill a few mobs close to town within the safety of the guards if you need to run, but if you want to hit up Orc Hill you’ll need 3-4 other players, and if you want to head into Crushbone and handle the Throne Room, you’ll need a full group. You need a well-balanced group of adventurers to handle whatever you might come across in the wild. You need gear. You need supplies. Bandages. Potions. Scrolls. A pack mule. Rope. Never leave home without a good length of rope.