Dancer Archive
Thread: If you want control, ask for more than the illusion of it.
Page 1 of 4
PoetDancer
Wed Apr 06, 2005 6:11 pm
#1
I am strictly, adamantly opposed to the notion of active authorizations to turn our passive mechanics into something that perhaps, someone might be convinced is worth paying to get.
Why? Because who is really in control?
You cannot say it is we who are in control of a buff. Because the patron has to keep on /watching and follow a procedure.
But our patrons cannot or will not take responsibility for it, because after all, it is we who initiate it.
And if we really, truly want something that we can authorize, control, and distribute in a way that we see fit, then why on Dathomir are we pushing this system that gives us so little we can actually control?
And what never really made sense is why we argue so strongly for controls on who may or may not gain mechanics from us, that we fail to see that we only control one small part in buffing now. We have NO CONTROL over granting a buff if the patron leaves early. We have NO CONTROL if they tell us they are /watching at the right time, but they don't. We have NO CONTROL if they are "aggroed," get killed, and are bugged.
And its because of that one small part that is under our authorization that buffing can be a strange and unclear process, filled with unclear roles, expectations, filled with uncertainty, and accompanied with dread when performed between two live players.
So who ultimately is the deciding factor in the production of the buff?
Both parties, for they are equally responsible for the results.
But if neither one is wholly responsible, then how can we hope to ever market, commoditize, and sell this "thing," when so much is beyond our control?
How can we charge or market a process that we cannot fully administer without coordination? We cannot. That is why I argue for no active protocols. Because it is only the illusion of control, and not the real thing.
But I am not even here to argue for pure passive mechanics. I am here to help us figure out how we can get what you all want: control.But it has to be more than /invite or /setperform. It has to be more than a trade wiindow, or a radial command. Because if that is the extent to which we want control over who gets mechanics, then we really don't gain much control at all. Not the sort of control that we can ultimately market and sell.
So rather than argue for a process that is both active and passive, where our very livelihoods are tied to a procedure and a coordination of parties that are wholly outside our control, why not argue, develop, and propose a system whereby a patron doesn't have to get involved in the process at all? Why not figure out a way where we have true control over who gets our mechanics, rather than this system where we can do nothing but a mere "/" to activate a passive application, and leave it out of our hands, subjecting our patrons to a potentially tedious experience?
I'll leave it up to you all to figure it out, because for me, I'm fine with total passivity. What I cannot deal with is this system that places me in a position of culpability even when something happens that is not my fault. What I cannot deal with is this system that cannot guarantee a result. What I cannot deal with is this system that depends on a procedure, a method, and a process.
I am fine with total passivity. But if there are some of us that simply cannot play this profession unless we have some control, then by all means. Let's develop a mechanic we can control. This is what I think we would have to have happen:
1) A fixed price. No more arguing what an /invite and an invitation for tedium is worth.
2)Instant application. No more subjecting ourselves and our patrons to a process where either of us has the potential to screw it up.
3)Something that doesn't interfere with our performance. No more breaking up groups. No more requests of "how much time is left?" No more need to spam progress reports, or negotiating a price.
4) Something where we can verify if it goes over successfully. No more getting cheated as a musician.
5)Something our patrons can quantify and compare without having to hear spam. A form of customer information that doesn't require us to explain.
Wesaywe want some control over who gets the mechanics. We say its the only means by which we can be viable. Let's create a real system that is intuitive, stress free, that is under our control, and is truly active in a way that doesn't alter the show, or create stress, or chains us to a process.
Any thoughts?
Drygo
Wed Apr 06, 2005 6:51 pm
#2
Of course, I still disagree with your premises. Or, at the very least whether we have full control, half control, or even 1% control, it is still that 1% control that allows us to decide if we want to provide a service to someone. They can't have it unless we give it to them. Same as someone wanting heals from a doctor. It doesn't matter what portion of control a doctor has, the point is the person doesn't get the heal unless the doctor wants him or her too.
And, I also think a /setperf isn't such a huge chain to my performing ability.
But, regardless. I think there's something to be said for the fact that for the sake of immersion this shouldn't necessarily have to be instantaneous.
But, it can still involve the patron not having to do anything except be there and /watch. And, I don't think that is too much to ask of a patron. I mean, in any profession that provides a service or commodity in SWG, the customer has to do something. Whether that means going to stand in line for a doctor buff, or going to a vendor to pick up a vibroknuckler. It all involves some participation by the person getting the commodity. And, I think a /watch and a minute in a Cantina is not too much to ask of the customer.
Now, as far as not having to make the patron get involved beyond that, I think it could be a simple matter of being allowed to give multiple /setperf commands. That's it. Someone can ask for a buff and we can buff them. It's really quite simple. And, both parties could have one of those smalltransparent window monitors (like the ham bar or something) that shows progress. A dancer or musician could even have a toggle in their options window to say that they never want to see those windows, so the dancer or musician never has to be concerned with time and can continue their performance. The person getting the buff has the window and can leave at any time depending on the strength of the buff they want. (Just like if somebody only wanted one stat buffed from a doc under the old system, they can leave whenever they want.) Because, as I said above, there always must be some minimal amount of customer effort to get a service or commodity in this game.
And, every dancer and musician can decide if they want to negotiate a price or just give everything away for free if they want to have minimal business related interaction. So, this is how it goes for the entertainer that wants the least business related interaction possible.
(Customer walks in)
Customer: Hi Sirii, can I get a buff, please?
Sirii: of course.
(Sirii types /setperf Customer)
(Sirii already has her toggle so that the buff window does not pop up)
The customer watches for however long he wants to. Maybe he only wants a 30 minute buff because he wants to just craft for a half hour. Maybe he wants a 3 hour buff because he plans on working on his FS experience. Maybe he doesn't necessarily want more than a 30 minute buff, but he stays for 20 minutes longer while you entertain him. But, the customer knows exactly when he has the amount of buff and can leave at any time. And, I think the customer would actually appreciate having a 2 inch by 2 inch transparent window in the upper right hand corner of their screen that goes away the moment he stops listening, and the actual buff now goes into the buff window.
It's not complicated, and requires about as minimal of an effort as can possibly be expected between any service oriented exchange between buyer and producer.
Would that really be so bad?
Message Edited by Drygo on 04-06-2005 06:53 PM
FuschiaD
Wed Apr 06, 2005 7:22 pm
#3
I still like the idea that once they start watching us, WE then get the option to buff them, from the radial menu. Quick, easy, no limitations on how many we can buff at one time. We'd just need to ensure that we always get the option on the radial menu.
Schardour
Wed Apr 06, 2005 7:22 pm
#4
PoetDancer wrote:
We have NO CONTROL over granting a buff if the patron leaves early.
Yet we control the information flow that lets them know when they may leave with a successful buff.
We have NO CONTROL if they tell us they are /watching at the right time, but they don't.
Procedural restrictions may be loosened while maintaining a sense of ownership. It could still be our controlled process, with or without their input. The system doesn't have to remain as it currently is. However, with controlled interaction comes procedure. It could be as simple as "You be nice to me, and I'll give you a buff." Requesting a buff with one click, and granting it with another is nearly as simple, and gives confirmation of the process. (Also avoids the verbal action that some players absolutely despise.)
We have NO CONTROL if they are "aggroed," get killed, and are bugged.
/bugreportYou're right, it's not our problem then. SOE owns that problem.
And its because of that one small part that is under our authorization that buffing can be a strange and unclear process, filled with unclear roles, expectations, filled with uncertainty, and accompanied with dread when performed between two live players.
I've never had a problem with the process, to be truthful, other than the bugs and weird sh!t (out of our control) that affect our buffs from time to time.
.......
Wesaywe want some control over who gets the mechanics. We say its the only means by which we can be viable. Let's create a real system that is intuitive, stress free, that is under our control, and is truly active in a way that doesn't alter the show, or create stress, or chains us to a process.
Sounds good.
SpaceCrazy
Wed Apr 06, 2005 7:37 pm
#5
PoetDancer wrote:
We have NO CONTROL over granting a buff if the patron leaves early. We have NO CONTROL if they tell us they are /watching at the right time, but they don't. We have NO CONTROL if they are "aggroed," get killed, and are bugged.
And its because of that one small part that is under our authorization that buffing can be a strange and unclear process, filled with unclear roles, expectations, filled with uncertainty, and accompanied with dread when performed between two live players.
So who ultimately is the deciding factor in the production of the buff?
Both parties, for they are equally responsible for the results.
But if neither one is wholly responsible, then how can we hope to ever market, commoditize, and sell this "thing," when so much is beyond our control?
How can we charge or market a process that we cannot fully administer without coordination? We cannot. That is why I argue for no active protocols. Because it is only the illusion of control, and not the real thing.
What you describe above as a lack of control and therefore no true ability to sell works well the other current buffing profession, Doctor. With the exception of watch/listen, each of the above also applies to Doctor buffs. Yet they have no problem selling their product.
It's because the customer knows what they have to do to receive the full buff. They know not to leave before all 6 stat buffs show in the buff window. They can be aggro'd by another player if they are Special Forces or by an NPC. But they know what they need to do to get a buff - pay the doctor, stand there and wait.
Our current buffs to have more issues in the application than doctor buffs because there is no solid interface that they them or us that they are in fact receiving the buff. With doctor buffs, they see the animation/graphic on their screen of the buff being applied, they see a system message that it's been applied and for what strength, and they see the icon in the buff window. Music/dance buffs don't have anything like that so it's often a pain for both parties to know if the buff is being applied.
Based on the early results of feedback of the inspiration buffs on TC-5, there is an indicator to both parties that they are getting the inspiration buff in the form of a system message with each tick. That should certainly ease some of the problems in application the current buffs have.
While we may not have FULL control, I don't need full control. Partial control is good enough for me. And the control I'm looking for is that if you want the buff from me, I have to do something to start it or you won't get it. If I decide not to give you the buff that is my decision and thus I am in control of who can and cannot receive "inspiration" from me. I may not want to buff someone because they are rude and obnoxious or because they are Imperial and I'm a Rebel or just because I feel like being a jerk. The reason why I don't give the buff isn't really important as they can be any number of reasons. But I want it to be MINE to give or not to give at my discretion. That is the control I want.
Message Edited by SpaceCrazy on 04-06-2005 10:39 PM
Ikewe
Wed Apr 06, 2005 8:33 pm
#6
QFE!!! Exactly! In order for me to feel like I actually have a purpose I have to know that something I did had an effect. If the entire system is transparent then it might as well be given to them by a stim in the field. There will be absolutely no way for me to know if anything I did in the cantina had a purpose if the system is transparent. With that being the case then why should I dance in the cantina at all? Why wouldn't I dance in a much more vibrant atmosphere like the grasses of Naboo, the Mountains of Corellia, the desert plains of Lok....etc? I'm supposed to want to stay in the cantina on the "off chance" someone will want an inspiration buff and might choose to get it from me in total secrecy? GAH!!
SpaceCrazy wrote:
And the control I'm looking for is that if you want the buff from me, I have to do something to start it or you won't get it. If I decide not to give you the buff that is my decision and thus I am in control of who can and cannot receive "inspiration" from me. I may not want to buff someone because they are rude and obnoxious or because they are Imperial and I'm a Rebel or just because I feel like being a jerk. The reason why I don't give the buff isn't really important as they can be any number of reasons. But I want it to be MINE to give or not to give at my discretion. That is the control I want.
Message Edited by SpaceCrazy on 04-06-2005 10:39 PM
PoetDancer
Wed Apr 06, 2005 10:00 pm
#7
But can't you see. You all may be satisfied with the system, but the patrons are not.
They want certainty. Let's give them certainty.
We talk of immersion, but it is already a contrived system. It is nothing more and nothing less than a gimmick to get us paid. Why is it I can expend the same action, have the audience see the same visuals, and have two different effects based upon some system protocol? No amount of dressing it up is going to change what it is: a gimmick to get us paid for dishing out mechanics.
So if its going to be contrived, let's do away with the need for our patrons tosustainthe /watch they don't want to sit through and just give them the damn thing, taketheir credits, and throw their 1337behinds out the door so we can get back on with doing other things.
That's all we really care about with an active mechanic, isn't it?
We don't need to shove our "ignorant prattle" down their throats, or maintain a "captive audience." Why make them suffer? Just get a trade window up, take the credits, give them the buff, and throw them out so they can do something they'd rather do.
That way, we maintain our interdependence, like Drygo wants. We get Ikewe credits. And we don't have to put up with 1337 jerks.
But what we all need is certainty. Let's make it certain. Let's make sure an unattendee cannot do it. Let's be able to set a price. Let's be able to sell it the moment they want it and get it out of the way as quick as possible so they can do other things, and we can do other things.
And then finally, maybe we can all rest easy, have fun, and not have to worry about getting paid, losing respect, or having fun.
Kareann
Wed Apr 06, 2005 10:18 pm
#8
I posted this idea in the in concept forum. I'll paste it here. My idea would only cause the watcher one extra click, and we'd only have to set up our preferences once and that's it. The actual process of how it's working on TC wouldn't really change, so I don't think there would be the problems like we have sometimes with /setp. Don't have any clue how to make it so it's not afk-able though....
I love the idea of these buffs, but like most entertainers I want to control my service and my income.
I don't think that dancers really need a pop-up every time someone watches us, we can set our fee via some kind of interface( that could also allow us to set it so only like factioned people can receive our buffs and allow people on our friends list to buff for free if we want). That way, when someone watches us.. they get the fee notice and either click accept or decline, and we don't have to do anything else.
We could also have a small window, about the size of the current combat queue window, that tells us who is watching. That's about the same ammount of interaction as the current version in now, but we still have control.
I love the idea of these buffs, but like most entertainers I want to control my service and my income.
I don't think that dancers really need a pop-up every time someone watches us, we can set our fee via some kind of interface( that could also allow us to set it so only like factioned people can receive our buffs and allow people on our friends list to buff for free if we want). That way, when someone watches us.. they get the fee notice and either click accept or decline, and we don't have to do anything else.
We could also have a small window, about the size of the current combat queue window, that tells us who is watching. That's about the same ammount of interaction as the current version in now, but we still have control.
Panthu
Wed Apr 06, 2005 10:51 pm
#9
Well, I like the straight passive on the Cantina buffing because I learned to like it for Sirii and Dancers like her that really wanted what the Devs kept telling me that set up was supposed to be doing for us and the game. It's the whole Noolos (or whatever his name is Sirii is so fond of 
) concept. Leet guy has to come in, nice RP Dancer pulls him out of his min/max mode, and all of a sudden the game world is a little more real to everyone. Both sides win. Social player and Combat player are both improved from the experience.
) concept. Leet guy has to come in, nice RP Dancer pulls him out of his min/max mode, and all of a sudden the game world is a little more real to everyone. Both sides win. Social player and Combat player are both improved from the experience. I also agree with Sirii that this will always have to be a fairly unique thing served by only a few. Mostly just because only a few players will be dedicated to this version of play enough to really spend the time and effort it would take to build up a real reputation this way. It's neat though, I'd like to see us get this back for the cantinas. I do think the Inspirations in their current version with the "anyone can dabble for it/Masters do it faster" BF/Wound Healing style scaling encourages this... and not botting.
I also agree with what Sirii has said about the Bots not mattering even if they do set up shop, because in this set up, the one who is the most charming (usually going to be someone ATK) will get the patron.
... now, here's where I have always started drifting away from things that Sirii (and more than a handful of Devs) would have approved of in the past, I think if we get something active it should travel. I don't think it should be tied to this Cantina set up. I think it should be something totally different we can do anywhere at anytime we want to. Yes, that would mean allowing it to be something useful in combat, but it could be general... it could be something that was just as useful during combat as it would be standing in a crafter's shop. *shrug* No clue if it will ever happen, but when I think active, that's what I've always really wanted honestly.
I get the downtime thing. I've just never believed it had to be our only thing. I had no idea others in here wanted something truly active though. I always said most Dancers hated that idea when other people asked me about it. Anyway, that's the only thing that will ever be true control. It's not a very Entertainer Concept idea, but, I personally would love it if we were ever offered something like that as an addition to the Cantina setup.
Has the Ent Community finally gotten to the point where they want to ask for an Anytime/Anywhere/Total Control Ability for ourselves?
Schardour
Thu Apr 07, 2005 1:45 am
#10
Else-Whira wrote:
My only problem with the passive approach is leaving our ability to earn in the hands of the people coming to see us. The reason why?
Entertainers will almost always have to be attractive and female to make it work.
Heh, one of my concerns as well.
Damn women that think it's all accomplished by "friendliness" and "hospitality," or even a "good show!"
That's right, I'm a male.
I know the truth...
Drygo
Thu Apr 07, 2005 4:09 am
#11
PoetDancer wrote:
That's all we really care about with an active mechanic, isn't it?
We don't need to shove our "ignorant prattle" down their throats, or maintain a "captive audience." Why make them suffer? Just get a trade window up, take the credits, give them the buff, and throw them out so they can do something they'd rather do.
I don't understand why it has to be black and white either/or. Because the game mechanic is not all I care about. And, the solution that you list here, while you may not have really meant it, is a bigger interruption to your performance than the solution that I mentioned. There's no reason to go to extremes.
There are ways to compromise and make things as little of a hassle as possible and increase the enjoyment of the game for both parties. All the other stuff...it's just semantics and argumentative for no reason other than to hold up ones ideals as pure and the only way to do things. It's narrow minded and uncompromising.
For while you have all these examples of how you can take customers away from buffbots and get tips no matter what, there are those of us who have different experiences. I was here too, at launch, ya know. And, yeah, I got some small tips here and there. But, relying on tips to make a decent income didn't work then, and I have never once been shown proof that it would work any differently now. I'm going by past example just like you are. And, I'm also going by a different premise of entertainer than you are. My idea of entertaining is not chatting with customers. Not saying I don't do that, but that's not what entertaining means to me. To me, entertaining means just that...entertaining. A performance, a band, etc. And, if all you or the devs or whoever thinks is entertaining is sitting around chatting and/or amusing, then there's never going to be common ground. You must realize there are different playstyles and reasons that people become entertainers. And, until you do that, you will never understand why we need active protocols for dispensing our buffs.
Let me try to put it in these terms:
You know how you don't want an active protocol to buff because it takes away from you being amusing? Well, similarly, another dancer may not want to have to chat and be amusing because it takes away from an actual performance. This particular dancer may be the master of impromptu performance. He/she may be able to manually flo their heart out, change dances, use lighting effects, and come up with an interesting performance every single time he/she goes into the Cantina. For the sake of argument, this person is a Master Dancer and has at his or her fingertips every single dance and effect available. This dancer is also male, and ...I dunno, for the sake of argument, a Sullustan. Let's say the band is currently playing a slow song like Ballad. This Sullustan is catering his dance style to that song, by doing only exotics, lyricals, and formals.
Now, both you and this Sullustan are in the Cantina. Let's say for the sake of argument that you only have as high as footloose in your repertoire. But, you're there interacting with the customers, talking, chatting, flirting (again, for the sake of argument). You've got your leotard on and you're /winking seductively. You're spazzing around doing the /butt waft from footloose.
Who, out of the two dancers, is going to get bigger tips? Who, under a completely passive inspiration system is going to have more people /watch'ing them? You are. Because unless this Sullustan is willing to reroll as a female human/twi'lek, or at the very least actively engage people in conversation and hear their life stories, he has no way of competing with you no matter how unique and truly inspirational his performance is dancing a few feet away by himself. No, in order to get tips, he must abandon his preferred playstyle to chat with people. He can't type fast enough to do the impromptu /flo's /effect's, and /changedance's, while at the same time holding a conversation. The requirement to be chatty hinders his performance so much more than the requirement to type /setperf hinders yours. His view of "pure entertainer" is, above everything, the performance. That's all he cares about, and he does not want any hindrance to this and actively tries to find ways on the forums to that allow him to adhere to his view of pure entertainer. And, your style of entertainer, Sirii, is hindering him from performing so much that he totally abandons the idea of trying to compromise for a way of all styles of entertainer...chatter, performer, healer, and support. He only wants performance to be acknowledged and nothing else. And while doing so, he actively tries to make your style of entertainer obsolete. How would you feel then?
Message Edited by Drygo on 04-07-2005 04:39 AM
Seakla
Thu Apr 07, 2005 4:31 am
#12
Sirii, I'm sure you've noticed the idea posted at the end of this thread which, to me, seems to answer many of the concerns you have.
The idea was posted by Jagii, bottom of page 2.
The idea was posted by Jagii, bottom of page 2.
Panthu
Thu Apr 07, 2005 4:37 am
#13
Drygo wrote:
There are ways to compromise and make things as little of a hassle as possible and increase the enjoyment of the game for both parties.
Ok, if they said they were going to try to do that system again where the patron asked for a flo and if you did what they said, it gave a bonus... if they said that again, would that satisfy anyone's complaint?
Because, the whole reason they offered that in the past I think was because (a) it's interactive for both the patron and the performer (b) it rewards ATK by giving a better service (c) it's sort of a mini-challenge.
It's not a direct answer to a secured payment plan nor is it truly active, but it goes a lot farther than just the survey bonus pop-ups. Anyway, if they dust that off and offer some version of that again, are people going to be interested this time?
Or is nothing short of either 100% active targeted selection and/or some sort of system payment (mission, NPC, whatever) going to cut it?
Page 1 of 4