Dancer Archive
Thread: No forced interaction??
annshadow
Fri Jul 08, 2005 10:10 am
#14
Suppose they should get rid of health damage because that make you have to interact with doctors and combate medics
Landlubber
Fri Jul 08, 2005 10:28 am
#15
annshadow wrote:
Suppose they should get rid of health damage because that make you have to interact with doctors and combate medics
Oh, they're getting there. Starting with Publish 20, dieing in space won't give you any more health wounds. And I think this has until now been of the largest (if not the largest) source of wounds.
So I think they are slowly phasing out health wounds as well. Simply because they messed up Doctor in the CU, which now means there are no more Docs in the med centers for wound healing. Of course they could just allow Docs to gain xp by healing wounds (and only wounds) in med centers (and only med centers), but I think a Dev has already stated they are not considering this (not sure where I read this to be honest, so I could be wrong here).
Ikewe
Fri Jul 08, 2005 10:36 am
#16
AH HA! So it's Drygo's fault. I'm kidding. I'm kidding. Sorry it's been a long week and I'm sleep deprived because of the time difference between the UK and here.Don't know why it's so hard for everyone in my family to have email or why it's so hard for those who do to gather all the info and send it at once.
Drygo
Fri Jul 08, 2005 10:52 am
#17
Jeebus, Panthu. Bringing up a very unpleasant memory...that thread and the way it turned out really ended up making me extremely frustrated with people.
Gah!
Drygo
Fri Jul 08, 2005 10:53 am
#18
Ikewe wrote:
AH HA! So it's Drygo's fault. I'm kidding. I'm kidding. Sorry it's been a long week and I'm sleep deprived because of the time difference between the UK and here.Don't know why it's so hard for everyone in my family to have email or why it's so hard for those who do to gather all the info and send it at once.
Oh, and also, lest anyone not understand this blast from the past. THERE IS NOWHERE IN THAT POST WHERE I ADVOCATED MAKING CANTINAS OR ENTERTAINERS USELESS, NOR DID I EVER SAY WE SHOULD HAVE ABSOLUTELY NO FORCED ACTION.
And, if anyone says that I did they're going to get the most painful bitchslap they've ever gotten in their entire lives.
I'm serious.
Reachwind
Fri Jul 08, 2005 10:58 am
#19
Panthu wrote:Reachwind, I ask you again, where have you seen that we are going into battle? Until that happens, I have no idea what you're psycho personal attacks on me are about.
These aren't psycho personal attacks I am merely pointing out that you are aggressively flaming anyone who dares disagree with your vision of dancer and the ideas and thoughts you pushed on the dev team as community opinion while acting as the dancer community correspondent and now as a glowie.
A personal attack would be if I called you a name or did anything other than argue your opinion and the facts as you see them.
I had many discussions with other dancers and musicians while I played in the game... Long time vets of the game and this forum that you personally helped chase off with the way you pushed for things that only you and a few that you interact with here on the forums and flamed anyone that tried to get a word in on their behalf. Look at the things you say now, every post you have made recently to anyone that has a serious problem with the removal of BF is either an outright flame or "you asked for it" response, which everyone here not sporting a blue name does not recall asking for or wanting.
Panthu wrote:The fact is that I didn't say all dancers wanted to be bards in battle and actually pointed out on many occasions that the most vocal Ent posters were very against any "Bard" association for us.
Based on the things you have been stating whenever someone steps up to call BS on this change it is VERY clear that you were actively pushing for the change of role from entertainers as postcombat healer types to precombat enhancer types. If I am not mistaken you mentioned having approached developers at some of the meetups to get this change.
Instead of acting as a voice for the community it seems like you are trying to act like the
manager of the community. Sorry, people are going to disagree with your personal opinions and come here to make their points too. Calling us psycho because we don't agree with you won't change the fact that we feel like this change is a back breaker to a once incredible and unique role in a great game.
picklesSW
Fri Jul 08, 2005 10:59 am
#20
I can't believe Drygo advocated making cantinas and entertainers useless. I'm completely appalled.
Drygo
Fri Jul 08, 2005 11:00 am
#21
picklesSW wrote:
I can't believe Drygo advocated making cantinas and entertainers useless. I'm completely appalled.
The bitchslap is supposed to be a deterrent. For you, however, I shall withold the bitchslap, as that will be yourpunishment.
picklesSW
Fri Jul 08, 2005 11:06 am
#22
Drygo wrote:
picklesSW wrote:
I can't believe Drygo advocated making cantinas and entertainers useless. I'm completely appalled.
The bitchslap is supposed to be a deterrent. For you, however, I shall withold the bitchslap, as that will be your punishment.
Esharra
Fri Jul 08, 2005 11:07 am
#23
Welcome back, Goldy!
SkySCREAMER wrote:
I'm digging through piles of crap getting excited every time I find an old favorite dress or pair of shoes I haven't seen in months.
Chessack
Fri Jul 08, 2005 11:13 am
#24
Well now Panth... lots of people can do forum searches and post clickies to threads. Challenge accepted.
For example, in this thread, JFreeman wrote, and I quote:
I don't know about you but it seems to me that the OP characterized their thinking quite exactly. JF said, specifically, "we don't want to force interaction." Hmm, that sounds an awful lot to me like the logic behind removing BF is that they don't want to force interaction given that he said just that in explaining why they are taking BF out of the game. Now maybe this "came from" us entertainers and maybe it didn't. That's really kind of beside the point. The fact is that, exactly as the OP said, BF is being taken out of the game because the devs do not want to force interaction. They want you to "go to an entertainer because you want to, not because you have to" (another exact quote).
The OP is quite exactly correct in pointing out that tons and tons of other content is based on forced interaction. You must interact with a doctor (or a Jedi) to get wounds healed (unless you have TKA meditation 4, which nobody but a TKA would have). You must interact with a crafter (through the medium of a vendor, or directly) to get a vehicle, a weapon, any sort of armor, food, or any other product you might care to name in the game. You must interact with a creature handler to get your pet trained. Oh sure, in these cases (at least other than wounds) you could say, "Well you don't need those things." Well that's technically true, but I doubt a commando would say he doesn't need a good weapon, or that any warrior (other than those pesky TKAs again) would say he doesn't need armor of some sort. And you cannot get any of these "needed" things without interaction.
In particular, the very logic that seeks to remove BF from the game, if you follow down to the end of JF's statement (wanting to go to us "to get something good" rather than "get rid fo something bad", again directly quoting), must require, of necessity, removing all wounds from the game as well. After all, wounds are exactly like BF right now. You can only get them healed by a doctor (barring Jedi or TKA self-healing, which are special cases). Isn't a wound a negative thing? Isn't it true that you need to remove wounds if you want to get into battle? (Or do you think it is reasonable to go into battle with, say, 1500 wounds out of 3000 total health? Surely not.) Isn't it true that going to a doctor to get rid of wounds is precisely, exactly, the same "needing to go to someone else to remove something negative" interaction they "don't want to force" on people with regard to BF?
If they're serious about wanting people to not be forced into interactions, then they have a lot of things to change about the game. But I don't see those things changing. In fact, just the opposite is being done. CHs have been told their pets will never be allowed to be uber-tanks again, because "that would mean you don't need anyone else" and they want to (you guessed it) force CHs to interact with the rest of the players rather than letting them be one-man teams. (Oh, they call it "encouraging" interaction but let's call a spade a spade, shall we?)
The problem is that if you get any benefit at all from interacting, whether it's healing a bad thing or gaining a good thing, any player who doesn't want to interact, but wants the benefit, is going to see it as "forced." I am sure there are people who hate crafters and consider having to, say, custom order a scythe from a weaponsmith to be "forced" interaction, because they don't want to be social and interact with the weaponsmith. Should we give them "pre-sliced weapon dispenser NPCs" so that they don't have to deal with those pesky weaponsmiths and slicers?
The answer in this case, and every other case where intearction is "forced" or "encouraged" (which you call it depends on your perspective, as I point out above), and I mean every time -- the answer of both the devs and those defending the interaction "encouragment/forcing" -- that answer, I say, from both devs and dev apologists, is, "This is an MMO. If you don't want to interact with others, go play a solo game." And yet, in true dramatic irony, the devs take the one social class in the game -- the one whose very focus is interactions -- and in that one case and no other, suddenly "this is an MMO and you should have to interact with other people" no longer applies.
The OP is correct. This is big-time double standard foo going on here.
C
For example, in this thread, JFreeman wrote, and I quote:
In general, we don't want to force interaction. You should go to watch an entertainer because you want to, not because you have to. It'll be better for this to be a positive interaction ("I go see an entertainer to get something good") rather than a negative interaction ("I go see an entertainer in order to get rid of something bad").
I don't know about you but it seems to me that the OP characterized their thinking quite exactly. JF said, specifically, "we don't want to force interaction." Hmm, that sounds an awful lot to me like the logic behind removing BF is that they don't want to force interaction given that he said just that in explaining why they are taking BF out of the game. Now maybe this "came from" us entertainers and maybe it didn't. That's really kind of beside the point. The fact is that, exactly as the OP said, BF is being taken out of the game because the devs do not want to force interaction. They want you to "go to an entertainer because you want to, not because you have to" (another exact quote).
The OP is quite exactly correct in pointing out that tons and tons of other content is based on forced interaction. You must interact with a doctor (or a Jedi) to get wounds healed (unless you have TKA meditation 4, which nobody but a TKA would have). You must interact with a crafter (through the medium of a vendor, or directly) to get a vehicle, a weapon, any sort of armor, food, or any other product you might care to name in the game. You must interact with a creature handler to get your pet trained. Oh sure, in these cases (at least other than wounds) you could say, "Well you don't need those things." Well that's technically true, but I doubt a commando would say he doesn't need a good weapon, or that any warrior (other than those pesky TKAs again) would say he doesn't need armor of some sort. And you cannot get any of these "needed" things without interaction.
In particular, the very logic that seeks to remove BF from the game, if you follow down to the end of JF's statement (wanting to go to us "to get something good" rather than "get rid fo something bad", again directly quoting), must require, of necessity, removing all wounds from the game as well. After all, wounds are exactly like BF right now. You can only get them healed by a doctor (barring Jedi or TKA self-healing, which are special cases). Isn't a wound a negative thing? Isn't it true that you need to remove wounds if you want to get into battle? (Or do you think it is reasonable to go into battle with, say, 1500 wounds out of 3000 total health? Surely not.) Isn't it true that going to a doctor to get rid of wounds is precisely, exactly, the same "needing to go to someone else to remove something negative" interaction they "don't want to force" on people with regard to BF?
If they're serious about wanting people to not be forced into interactions, then they have a lot of things to change about the game. But I don't see those things changing. In fact, just the opposite is being done. CHs have been told their pets will never be allowed to be uber-tanks again, because "that would mean you don't need anyone else" and they want to (you guessed it) force CHs to interact with the rest of the players rather than letting them be one-man teams. (Oh, they call it "encouraging" interaction but let's call a spade a spade, shall we?)
The problem is that if you get any benefit at all from interacting, whether it's healing a bad thing or gaining a good thing, any player who doesn't want to interact, but wants the benefit, is going to see it as "forced." I am sure there are people who hate crafters and consider having to, say, custom order a scythe from a weaponsmith to be "forced" interaction, because they don't want to be social and interact with the weaponsmith. Should we give them "pre-sliced weapon dispenser NPCs" so that they don't have to deal with those pesky weaponsmiths and slicers?
The answer in this case, and every other case where intearction is "forced" or "encouraged" (which you call it depends on your perspective, as I point out above), and I mean every time -- the answer of both the devs and those defending the interaction "encouragment/forcing" -- that answer, I say, from both devs and dev apologists, is, "This is an MMO. If you don't want to interact with others, go play a solo game." And yet, in true dramatic irony, the devs take the one social class in the game -- the one whose very focus is interactions -- and in that one case and no other, suddenly "this is an MMO and you should have to interact with other people" no longer applies.
The OP is correct. This is big-time double standard foo going on here.
C
Panthu
Fri Jul 08, 2005 11:30 am
#25
Reachwind wrote:
If I am not mistaken you mentioned having approached developers at some of the meetups to get this change.
I've never been to a meet up. They have those in Austin and I don't live anywhere near there. They are run by players, not devs though devs sometimes do go. Scip and Jessi are the only two Ent playing blue names that I know attend.
You might be remembering when I said I had asked if "BF could go?" at the summit. Yes, I did. I also ran my butt back in here and reported what was said. That is the only time I ever remember specifically asking if BF could be removed.
It was directed to Kelderan who was in charge of the CU talks they were giving us along with Blixtev. Tiaga was in the room too. I assume you can trust Tiaga? Anyway, I had actually been asking about Mind Buffing and a proposal JEST3R and some of the other combat corrs had put together. I was asking what its chances of implementation were and the train of conversation from the answers led to BF.
It was an exploratory questions. To see how much wiggle room we had to meet our goals in the game. It was not something I had been pushing. Honestly, I only remember ever asking that BF be updated or improved up until that point.
The rest of your post is wacko, thanks, so I'll skip responding to those points. Oki?
Panthu
Fri Jul 08, 2005 11:35 am
#26
Chessack wrote:
Well now Panth... lots of people can do forum searches and post clickies to threads. Challenge accepted.
Oh please no, no challenges, lol. Reachwind gives me enough of that. 
I have no problem with people being worried about this, I have a very big problem with making it out that the Devs are doing this to us while we were just happily bouncing along. We had issues, this was one possible solution. I don't know that it's the right one, but I am hopeful it will work.
I don't think JFreeman's quote was meant to refer to the whole game, I think it was meant to be Ent specific.