Dancer Archive
Thread: If you want control, ask for more than the illusion of it.
FuschiaD
Thu Apr 07, 2005 4:41 am
#14
I want there to be something I must do on MY END - something that CANNOT be replicated in a macro - that will make the patron receive the buff.
Otherwise, we're just all buffbots IMO.
Panthu
Thu Apr 07, 2005 5:02 am
#15
Drygo wrote:There are a lot of different solutions to this problem. And, I think if people stopped worrying about preserving only their notion of entertainer, than we could up with something that is workable for all parties involved.
Well, that's why I personally have gotten pretty fond of the system payment as a reward for performing in the Cantina. It is the most forgiving. It makes the most sense in a game where the most common form of income deals with getting missions form terminals/NPCs, player runs out to do the mish, player gets paid.
Our own missions would work fine for us like that if (a) you could get the "mission" with out having to completely remove yourself from the social environment, like, by sticking it in the back room(b) you still would need to actively move/respond in some way that can not be AFKed and (c) it paid well. To really match up to combat mishes, it would also need to increase XP gain and reward for skill level/team level by scaling pay out.
To me, this doesn't disturb chat, it doesn't disturb performance, it is a much greater reward for ATK because it goes to the Ent and not the patron... and it goes with the game fine. I just have a feeling the old offer is what is going to end up coming down instead of something like this. It would be nice if no one was shocked if it does and we just have clear questions/feedback readyinstead. 
kirah_ashlin
Thu Apr 07, 2005 5:06 am
#16
I think what concerned most of us (well, me, anyway)about the "do flo such-and-such" idea was 1) the loss or disruption of RP emmersion, 2) the pop-up box spam, and 3) the potential for griefing.
I see where the devs are coming from with a completely passive buff system. Their idea is that it affords "social" players the opportunity to be completely emmersed in the role play aspect of the game without interference from obtrusive game mechanics. I like that, honestly I do.
However, while I enjoy "play acting" it helps to have a receptive audience. I liken it to a dinner theater where the patrons are supposed to be part of the show. If you have a patron who came for the greatfood, butresists being involved at all in the interactive play, it becomes a chore for everyone. And, unfortunately for us, so many of the other players have already shown us that they are not only uninterested in our performance, they resent being forced to interact in the "play". They want top quality food from a drive through and they usually don't want to pay for it either. With the advent of buffbots our profession has become morelike that machine on Star Trek where you told it what you wanted to eat or drink andthe itemmagically and instantly appeared for you. No interaction, no fee.
I'm not sure what the answer is. Total passivity (leaving us completely at the mercy of "good will")? Total control (which could spawn buffbots)? A merging of the two somehow (which will undoubtedly still have positives and negatives)?
I'm about at the point where I am just ready to let the devs do what they will with us (seems they intend on doing that regardless) and then make my decision. I'm tired of proposing, supposing, arguingand cajoling.
Panthu
Thu Apr 07, 2005 5:27 am
#17
/hug Kirah
Boy, do I understand that feeling.
... but hey, does anybody remember the Maze Game from that other game some of us used to play? Drygo?
It was a two person challenge where each had a role, but the reward was mutually beneficial... namely, big money if you worked well together and each did your part well so you'd beat it fast. It relied on good communication, which fits the Social/Chat definition. It wasn't just a gate to something good, playing it actually was fun and beating it fast got the reward. It's the best example of a two person challenge in a social setting I can think of that's anything like this.
If it could be done like that, I think it might be cool. It's just, in my mind the only way that's ever really worked would be if the buffing just kind of happened by default in the Cantinas (passive) and the mini-game was something else the Entertainers did with the patrons as more of a Cantina Game Host. Which then makes me think there could be a lot of different options of games like this where Ents would have a Host role, but not having directly to do with a "service" per say.
Blah, rambling... anyway, is there any way to do what the Devs seemed to be trying with that idea but make it less of a burden and more of a real game that both parties could enjoy? What makes me nervous about that plan as it was offered is mostly just that I imagine it will end up being something to either work around or ignore completely and will end up never actually being fun or rewarding for anyone.
... but maybe if it could be more like the Maze Game, if that could be turned into some kind of dance/song game, that might be cool.
Message Edited by Panthu on 04-07-2005 08:29 AM
Serae
Thu Apr 07, 2005 5:31 am
#18
How about we get a bar that fills a littlewhen we do a flourish the patron likes and empties a little if we do a flourish they dislike (the like/dislike part is completely random ala Theatre quest)
When the bar is full we execute a 'finishing move' that zaps the patron with a force lightning type effect (but more like a bright beam of light) The patron then leaps to his feet doing an all-new /hallelujah emote!
He is truely Inspired.
Hmmmm
Or maybe keep it passive
Kareann
Thu Apr 07, 2005 5:31 am
#19
This game is supposed to be a player based economy. The combat profs bring the initial credits in with their missions and that filters down from there. I don't really have an interest in having the developers decide how much I get paid. We see how much they value what we do with what our missions pay out.
I also do not want to become a performing monkey and basically jump through hoops for some 1337 dood. Most of the ents aren't looking for INTERactivity, they just don't want their service given a way passively. I don't see how the devs can read the thread in the in concept forum and come to the conclusion that wanting control over who we buff, and how much we get paid, means that we want to have some kind of mini game with our watcher.
It needs to be as simple as setting our preferences, and the watcher accepting, declining, or being denied for whatever reason. The idea Chii posted in the focus thread is a good one, something like that or the one I posted will make it SEEM pretty much passive.
I also do not want to become a performing monkey and basically jump through hoops for some 1337 dood. Most of the ents aren't looking for INTERactivity, they just don't want their service given a way passively. I don't see how the devs can read the thread in the in concept forum and come to the conclusion that wanting control over who we buff, and how much we get paid, means that we want to have some kind of mini game with our watcher.
It needs to be as simple as setting our preferences, and the watcher accepting, declining, or being denied for whatever reason. The idea Chii posted in the focus thread is a good one, something like that or the one I posted will make it SEEM pretty much passive.
kirah_ashlin
Thu Apr 07, 2005 5:36 am
#20
Since SWG is the first RP game I've played, I haven't a clue what the Maze Game is. However, I'm not at all opposed to games as long as it is not limited to just one other player and overlays (in other words, doesn't interfer with) the group the entertainer (or the patron, for that matter) may already be in. There is the potential for exploiting, however. I can just see "gamebots" being the next rage, though, if something isn't done about the ability to play our profession AFK.
Panthu
Thu Apr 07, 2005 5:46 am
#21
Serae wrote:
How about we get a bar that fills a littlewhen we do a flourish the patron likes and empties a little if we do a flourish they dislike (the like/dislike part is completely random ala Theatre quest)
When the bar is full we execute a 'finishing move' that zaps the patron with a force lightning type effect (but more like a bright beam of light) The patron then leaps to his feet doing an all-new /hallelujah emote!
He is truely Inspired.
Hmmmm
Or maybe keep it passive
Ha, Fade! 
I'm with you though, I've really wracked my brain trying to think of a fun way to do a flo game like this that would be fun.... but in the end it always just seems like a pain. Then when you try to add it in as something to do with the buffing/healing effect, it just seems even goofier.
That's why when I say "Cantina Mini Games" I'm talking about casino games that work more like grouped objects and have absolutely nothing to do with the buffing/healing that is passively going on in the Cantina at the same time. Then, people play the games for fun and money when they want to. Ents perform when they want to and how they want to. Patrons still get their healing and buffing. It's just a lot more straight forward that way. No goofiness.
Anyway, I read the In Concept thread. I have a strong feeling the Devs will see the same things there that made them offer that old In Concept way back. I have a feeling we'll be seeing that again.
Akaara
Thu Apr 07, 2005 5:56 am
#22
How about if the patrons had to pay an entrance fee of some kind to get into the cantina (player city cantinas too), and only so many patrons could be allowed to enter the cantina at one time. The credits earned from the patrons enteringgoes to all active dancers/ents/musicians who are in the cantina (plus a little more from the manager).
Message Edited by Akaara on 04-07-2005 08:57 AM
Ravanne_Esi
Thu Apr 07, 2005 6:02 am
#23
What is so hard about the concept of a buff that Iinitiate? If a player wants a buff they ask for it, just like they do now with doctors. If I want to give a buff I give it, if I want payment for it I tell the player my price. They either pay it or they don't, they either get their buff or they don't. It's simple, its easy, its well understood by all. With no funky pop-up boxes initiated by the buffee I am not disrupted, I can continue my RP and socializing without interuption and can make giving the buff part of it. If the process of actually initiating the buff is done correctly, I know given our past experience that's a real strech, it would not be AFKable.
Keep it simple and under our control.
Message Edited by Ravanne_Esi on 04-07-2005 08:04 AM
Aleyo
Thu Apr 07, 2005 6:06 am
#24
Regarding system payment: how does a compromise between a full player-economy based income and a system income sound.
Basically, there's a base rate that the system will pay out regardless (so we don't go poor if no one helps us). Then each day (or other arbitrary amount of time), either a) patrons can pay a cantina manager money so that it will eventually get to us, or b) patrons can tip registered entertainers and that tip could be tracked. Then, depending on how much is given by patrons on that day, the base 'salary' would increase accordingly.
It encourages us to make the cantina as a whole a fun place, because the more anyone pays on behalf of anyone, the more we'll get overall. (I don't think (b) would work out well because it'd be too easy to just tip huge amounts of money back and forth and exploit it. The problem with (a) is it's a little clumsy for a patron to be entertained by someone, but then pay an NPC at the bar or the backroom instead of that entertainer directly).
I don't know how easy something like this could be made to work, but if the idea is at all appealing, go ahead and brainstorm it a bit.
Basically, there's a base rate that the system will pay out regardless (so we don't go poor if no one helps us). Then each day (or other arbitrary amount of time), either a) patrons can pay a cantina manager money so that it will eventually get to us, or b) patrons can tip registered entertainers and that tip could be tracked. Then, depending on how much is given by patrons on that day, the base 'salary' would increase accordingly.
It encourages us to make the cantina as a whole a fun place, because the more anyone pays on behalf of anyone, the more we'll get overall. (I don't think (b) would work out well because it'd be too easy to just tip huge amounts of money back and forth and exploit it. The problem with (a) is it's a little clumsy for a patron to be entertained by someone, but then pay an NPC at the bar or the backroom instead of that entertainer directly).
I don't know how easy something like this could be made to work, but if the idea is at all appealing, go ahead and brainstorm it a bit.
Hobbytla
Thu Apr 07, 2005 6:06 am
#25
Sirii, I address this to you, but it's more a general statement in the debate which you have brought up. Don't take it as a personal thing is something offends you.... it's not meant like that.
The idea that all other services are completely perfectand very simple are not true.
Doctor buffs require the person to stay put too - and it requires them to first heal their battle fatigue, something which the doctor has absolutely no control over. True, if the doctor does a /diagnose first, they can see that. But the buff docs don't. Those things are the customer's responsibility, and there will be no refund if the buff doesn't take full strength.
Even the most simple healing from a medic requires the battle fatigue to be low - also not the responsibility of the medic.
An image designer can't migrate stats if the customer has wounds in any of the stat bars. This is the customer's responsibility, not the image designer's.
The fact that you feel powerless over supplying the buff is because there is no interface, no /diagnose, or anything else where this is a controlled procedure.
You choose to keep the somewhat at timeswonky buff-system, and put all the blame on the customer, instead of asking for something which would give both customer and entertainer peace of mind where you can see what is going on. You want to be able to say 'hey, it's not my fault or my responsibility to buff you - you're on your own'.
I would prefer more control, for my own sake and for that of the customer.
Because if indeed the mechanics of the buff is the same now, there will be failed buffs. You just want to wash your hands of it and leave the customer to deal with it themselves.
Because if indeed the mechanics of the buff is the same now, there will be failed buffs. You just want to wash your hands of it and leave the customer to deal with it themselves.
But this is not really that important, how the buff works or what people want from the system and the devs.
It seems that the main thing is that a performer should be wanted for their performance and/or their personality, not for the services they can provide.
I don't think anyone sees any problem with this. The problem comes when you want to compete in the same cantina with people who like providing other players with a service or commodity. For you, this commodity has no value. Which is fine - you are entitled to that opinion. And I think most entertainers see the value in the performance as well as in the services/commodities.
The question then is; If people really want to tip and pay you for your performance and not your services - why don't you perform somewhere where you can't give them these services? At the starport, in the Coronet square where people meet to trade, buff, find groups and get missions, on a street corner, in the Mining Outpost?
Will they still come? Will they still tip?
I think they just might, and they just might enjoy it a lot.
But they would mostly happen upon you, they wouldn't seek you out. And once you have acknowledged that, you also have to acknowledge that you are as dependent as having a service to provide as everyone else playing an entertainer. The services and the "entertaining" are linked. You look down on people who are focusing on the services they can provide people, since you are above that. But just as they are afraid that very few would come to visit them if they didn't have anything to provide, that they would be redundant no-players in a MMOG, so would you.
So, you say that those of us who want a service we can control and control who we provide it to, you make it into a greed issue.
If you want an active interface, you are greedy, you just want to sell something, etc.
No. I want to have a purpose in the game. Something which is mine to give, not for others to take.
Those who are active in performing on events and tours etc will still be able to enjoy that no matter what, as long as the professions are available to be played. But that is just not enough for a lot of us.
I can only speak for myself here. I love SWG and the different professions it provides. I have 5 characters of my own, and me and my boyfriend have 2 we play together. I don't spend that much time consistently on any one server to be heavily socially involved. When I feel like logging my entertainer char on, I want to go to the cantina, dance and play music (which for me are very FUN in itself for me). But if I play for 4 hours one day, I don't want to stand there all by myself, not talking to anyone or interacting with anyone. There is not that much to do, content wise for entertainers. I rely on customers coming in for healing - that's how the profession is designed. It's designed to be a social profession, just like the medic anddoc professions.
If I have no function, I can't do that anymore. I would be forced to "perform" which is something I might enjoy once I learn the profession, sure, but as I said, I'm too hooked on the different characters I play to play just one character on one server everyday consistently. And that is more or less needed if I want to be part of an active performance group. Perhaps not to perform, but to be part of 'the gang' you have to log on regularly and do your part. Maybe in time I will do that too - or do what others tend to do, stick to one server and get alts. (my favorites atm are Sunrunner and Starsider...)
You are allowed to frown on me, the dabbler, but I still have as much right as anyone else to enjoy the profession. This is a game, not Mensa. If I want to play an entertainer then I should be able to. The game mechanics should allow that. In fact, that's how I even got interested in entertaining. My scout picked up entertainer for her own needs, equipped her slitherhorn, some people stopped by in her camp, and a love for entertaining was born. I struggle the most with dancing, which is probably why I read, or should I say study,the dancer forum more than any other forum, to pick up hints. I take my entertainer very seriously. Just not in consistent log-in time. A few weeks I do this, a few weeks I do that...., few hours here, few hours there...
To have fun entertaining I rely on the mechanics of the game to make my game time interesting. And performing alone just won't do that.
Without AFK this might all be different. My entertainer might not stand alone in a cantina waiting for customers because I can't stand to be in a sea of unattended characters, and I could be "part of the gang" even if I only show up every two weeks, because it would be much more effortless to hook up. But alas, at the moment we have what we have. And in that environment I do want to a real function, because otherwise I have nothing.
Hobbytla
Thu Apr 07, 2005 6:38 am
#26
Oops, seems that the debate has moved on since I started writing. please disregard...
I don't understand why it has to be so complicated to make a service active. And it isn't, if the concern was that WE decide who gets access to our services. The problem is that it needs to not be able to be done AFK by those who don't care who has access to their services, which is of course where all the unpalatable suggestions for pop-up boxes comes.
The way that I see it it doesn't have to be more complicated than it has to be. There are a few things which are non-macroable in the game, or at least not appealing to macro.
- Certain pop-up boxes, on either or both sides of the transaction.
- Procedures requiring resources.
- A radial dial.
Resources are out, I think? Yep. Pop-up boxes... not very popular.
So - a radial dial? When someone wants to "Start Watching or Listen" by clicking on your toon- they will instead send a request to you, just like the system message you get when trading. All you have to do is click on them and "Allow' (or whatever), and the "channel" is open.
I would prefer if this system message was accompanied by a specific sound though, so it's not lost in spam or while doing something else.
And yes, there IS such a radial dial in the game which is not macroable. The scout camp 'Disband camp' option. To disband a camp you can either get yourself in combat, which is tricky since if you don't stay in combat for more than a certain time the camp will still stay up, OR let it time out and disappear. (not sure how long this is, but it's a looong time). This is what have made the survival tree the rangers defence against the expoiting masses. You can macro it overnight, but it still takes an awful long time and is tedious. Given that these options (getting yourself in combat or timing out the camp) are not options for an entertainer, it sounds pretty close to perfect to me.
Would something like that also be too intrusive for the performer?
That's me chipping in for a suggestion anyway.