MMORPG: Release 30's Big Changes

Personally, if a companion of mine kept trying to change my behaviour, or outfit, or anything else, I wouldn't be their companion for long.

It seems like negotiating with companions will happen and rather than us giving instructions with a yes/no response, maybe they'll suggest to us that we should go and find better shields before entering these caves, or ask us for the gem socketed sword that's sitting unused in our backpacks. Companion interaction along these lines seems more satisfying to me than opening them up to direct manipulation of any kind.

 

I was teasing you a bit. I knew you weren't actually offended. =)

The problem with modern social media, in all it's forms, is that the certifiably brain-dead hold sway equal to that of the most erudite. ...and because the plebs outnumber us... well... =)

I think the days of lurking in forums to judge the value of anything is pretty much over. Best bet is Let's Play videos and live streams, I think. You can't really rely on the media even, because games are starting to zero in on specific audiences and you can't be certain the guy writing about a given game is really into the same sorts of things you are, or not.

 

How dare those peons give their opinion, while you and other enlightenend erudites have the Truth on how a wonderful way SotA is developped !

 

I have a problem with that. So Fiona uses a crossbow, fine. But what if she has no ammo anymore or if the crossbow breaks? What will she use then? In such a case a normal person would use the next weapon available to him/her. So why should she be opposed to using a sword in certain situations if it would save her life?
With an AI she could switch weapons as she sees fit. But it should never lead to a situation in which she just doesn't use a weapon and gets killed because she doesn't want to use a certain type of weapon.
Another thing: If we can give her (or the other companions) weapons, armor and other items, we should be able so see what they carry so that we have a clue about what they have with them so that we see if what we want to give them is better. Also what if I give someone better armor and he/she uses it but then my old arnour breaks and I would like to have the spare armour of my companion?
Also how much can I give a companion? How much can he carry? Can I give him/her 10 armour and 15 swords? If so, why? Can he/she drop items he/she doesn't need them anymore or give them to me?
What if I have more than one companion? I find a better pair of gloves and give them to Fiona but Ariel doesn't have gloves. How can Fiona give Ariel the spare gloves?

There is much more to such a system than "nannying". I'd call it teamwork and managment. I give my friend a new weapon and he decides if he wants to use it. If not, he gives it back to me. If he wants to use it then what happens to his old weapon?

And programming an AI that can manage all of this is easier than letting us manage the gear etc. of the companions ourselves?

 

I am actually for the changes.

1: I was starting to notice a pattern as after each wipe that many users would show me there suit that they have built and then I notice the drop in users playing soon after.( like as if they loss interest or something ). I too was starting to have a little of this and was wondering what was the point in learning crafting if you already have your desired suit and weapon!!!

2: Also I noticed ( As I am Miner with a vendor) that after a wipe large demand for ore and the such then a huge drop soon after.. The last release did make it last a little longer due the destruction of items on failed enchantment attempts but it started to fade as well towards the end of the last 2 weeks.

3: I was one that wanted locked targeting back though one user that replied to me once did have a good point about the magic bullet effect that accompanies locked targeting.. This is something that should be looked at in the next releases so that if your locked to a target ( like when you are an archer for instance ) your arrow does not follow your target everywhere ( through trees, other enemies, buildings, etc...) and should be this way for NPC and monsters as well..
I find it a little odd that an archer can shoot an arrow at me while I am running quickly around a corner and the arrow actually still hits me even though I am out of range and sight.!!!

4: I Do think though durability should last ( with skill levels for armor preservation above 80 ) more than 20 hours of fighting before wearing out your suit ( without the need for obsidian crowns ) I do have confidence that the devs will adjust it fairly for everyone.. I guess we will all see it soon enough

 

That's what concerns me about the article... in reading the first paragraph, the tone is set that things must be rushed for final wipe. But targeting could be changed without causing a need for another wipe. It comes too close to making final wipe sound like some sort of release, hard or soft, although it doesn't explicitly say that. It also doesn't explicitly talk about the end-of-year fuller release plan, so people who haven't been following the development are going to be confused.

This is still a big communication issue. If someone who is so supportive of the game doesn't address it, what will the other reviews do?

 

Is it just me or is the new targeting system easy mode?

 

It's still a bit off, I liked it better in R29. I'd love to be able to get rid of that red targeting cross or whatever it is, at least a highlight bar to reduce how bright it is. I'd like to not see it at all. I feel like I'm playing a clunky fps right now.

 

If you are referring to the reticle, I believe there is a fader bar for it and, if you turn it down all the way, you can't see the reticle at all.

At least that was all true for the previous release.

 

Not the reticle, I got that turned all the way down to get rid of it. The clunkly looking red targeter on mobs while you're fighting is the one I'm talking about.

 

Yeah sure but this whole autoaiming stuff is creepy.
What is it good for? Where is the fun if combat feels like I am botting?

 

I'm not seeing what good this new fps targeting is bringing to the table that makes combat better altogether really yet. I'm not seeing the benefit of having it. Suppose we just have to wait and see what else is in store for us with it.

 

Ahhh - I've only logged in quite briefly for the last few releases so had only seen the reticle - I'm saving myself for July.

 

This is what it looks like.

 

The horror.....the horror.... (heart of Darkness voice)

 

LoL, my son just asked me if I drew that with a magic marker just to be funny. Of course he knows it's not though.

 

Exactly, so what's the problem again?

Or how about the NPC just flat out tells you what it doesn't see anything in your inventory that's worth giving? NPCs are already scanning my inventory for quest items.

You GAVE the items! See? This is the kind of behavior I don't want people to have; seeing NPCs as just some kind of pet robot slave.

You call it "teamwork" but try doing that in real life! Give something to a teammate and then ask them to give it back a month later. I can just image the conversation: "Hey, remember that armour I gave to you that's currently protecting you? Yeah, that! I want it back because mine broke and as my teammate you should do exactly as I tell you!"

Imagine this scenario:

• You find gloves.
• You give it to Fiona.
• Fiona already had default gloves but it's hers and won't give it, if her new gloves break, she reverts to her default gloves.
• You find better gloves.
• You give it to Fiona.
• Fiona gives the previous gloves (not her default ones) to you automatically.
• You give those gloves to Ariel.
• Ariel already had default gloves but it's hers and won't give it, if her new gloves break, she reverts to her default gloves.
• Both Fiona and Ariel call you a jerk for not simply giving the new gloves to Ariel as you're obviously playing favourites.

You don't need the computer to have a conscience in order to fake this kind of behavior. Like I've been saying, the Elder Scrolls have been doing something very similar to this since 2001 maybe even before that (I don't know much about Daggerfall's NPCs). It's not even that complicated; iIt's certainly way easier than pathfinding let me tell you.

 

So I find a chest with items. Some of them would be interesting for the companion. If I am not allowed to give it to him then how des he get it? Will he rummage through the chest himself? Maybe even before I see what is inside? How can I tell what he took from the chest?

It's not about the armor the companion currently wears it is about spare armour he may carry around.

So we could have a group inventory into which we put all of the items we found and don't need ourselves and the companions take those items they need and can use from the group inventory and put back the items they don't need, so that we can sell or drop them or whatever.

But for this to work we need some mechanics with which we can "trade" with the companions. Also it would be nice to see what they are capable of and what they wear. We can even look at the paperdoll of other players, so we should be able to do that with NPC companions, too.

 

@Lord_Darkmoon I'm not against the idea of giving items to NPCs, I'm against the idea of controlling every aspect of the character.

The thing about teamwork is dealing with the quirks of all the members, not doing everything the leader says. The more control the player has over the NPCs, the more empty shells they become.

I'm actually against the player "inspect" paperdoll... I'll will drop guilds/groups the instant anyone mentions anything that I'm wearing/wielding.

What kind of obsessive behavior gives you the right to look at my stuff?

 

First, that was mostly tongue in cheek. My fault for neglecting to wave the sarcasm flag, though.
I'll never forget again! />

But seriously, that wasn't really directed at people who disagree with me. I actually LOVE it when people disagree with me. There are actually folks on the Port team that I have an absolute blast hanging out with precisely because we DO disagree on so many things. Disagreement doesn't mean the other person is stupid, though. ...Or even wrong, for that matter. No, you should never mistake my derision for someone to be related to what side of any issue they take. What I have less tolerance for is bandwagon evidence, and it's the idea that SotA is Pay-to-Win, in this case. There are pay to win games. There' s a specific definition of what pay to win is, but SotA is a long way from that. Had those targeted by my derision put forth even a modicum of effort in trying to understand what pay-to-win is, and had a valid point for why they felt SotA fell in that category, there would have been a far different conversation there.

I embrace opposing ideas, as I think everyone should. It's only through embracing dissonance and fully exploring alternative positions that we truly come to understand any subject. When you really dig deep and try to understand a point from the opposing view, and that's Truth. Not one side or the other, but a holistic understanding of why everyone involved feel the way they do about it. Opinions are just that. They're most definitely NOT Truth, though some like to pretend otherwise.

There are certainly times these devs have done things that I disagreed with, and I've taken shots at them. In every case though, I understood why they did what they did. I made sure I knew why it was a good move from their point of view, or I would have never mentioned it in an article because it would have been obvious to me that I was missing something. Negativity is easy. People who engage in it without effort to understand their opponents are stupid, but it's a self-imposed ignorance that will absolutely be a target of all the acidity I can muster. I pray for two things: That I'll never be so wrapped up in my own sense of self-importance that I fail to give good consideration to an opposing view, and that I never grow tolerant of those who choose to wallow in their own ignorance(even when they're notionally on "my side").