Rift: Planes of Telara

[Chockonuts]

Everquest 2 had alternate functionality for skills in pvp. The tooltips even explained what they did in pvp and pve. So it has been done before. What I don't understand is why Hartsman never pushed for the same functionality in Rift since i am pretty sure that mechanic was his baby in EQ2 at least partially.

Speaking of Hartsman, guess who's back again, but supersized now and wearing a cape :

Scott Hartsman returns to Trion, takes CEO role

Interesting times indeed.

[Phred]

I think you mean, "multiboxers can't follow"?  I've been playing this a bunch lately and (from chat) it seems that the PvP playerbase is convinced that multiboxing needs to be excised.

Actually it was a tiny fraction of the pvp crowd who spammed threads on the forums. Heck of a precedent.

[Sky]

I think you mean, "multiboxers can't follow"?  I've been playing this a bunch lately and (from chat) it seems that the PvP playerbase is convinced that multiboxing needs to be excised.

Actually it was a tiny fraction of the pvp crowd who spammed threads on the forums. Heck of a precedent.

This is the biggest red flag about EQN, imo. This modern gen Y millenial bullshit idea of social game development.

So inside the bottle to hear 'The game YOU want to play' and not clearly see 'The game loudmouthed sociopaths want to play'.

[Jerrith]

Actually it was a tiny fraction of the pvp crowd who spammed threads on the forums. Heck of a precedent.

If spamming threads on the forums got you features in Rift, wouldn't we have arenas in Rift by now? :)  (Arenas are perhaps the most spammed request on the forums.  They're still not coming to Rift.)

While spamming threads can raise awareness - it is *not* the only factor.  I have personally encountered people multi-boxing on an opposing team.  I have killed them, and I have been killed by them.  So we're *trying* turning it off - it's a configuration value we can change instantly, on the fly.  If you think it's a bad choice, make your voice heard on the official forums.

Speaking of Hartsman, guess who's back again, but supersized now and wearing a cape :

Scott Hartsman returns to Trion, takes CEO role

Interesting times indeed.

[Phred]

While spamming threads can raise awareness - it is *not* the only factor.  I have personally encountered people multi-boxing on an opposing team.  I have killed them, and I have been killed by them.  So we're *trying* turning it off - it's a configuration value we can change instantly, on the fly.  If you think it's a bad choice, make your voice heard on the official forums.

Nope doesnt effect me in the slightest. Probably the best solution. But can you honestly say it would have been on your radar at all if it hadn't had threads spammed on the forum to the point of locking?

[Sky]

Why not just disable it in pvp instances (including pvp server as an 'instance')? Why also screw the pve boxers?

(disclaimer: I don't multibox)

[Phred]

That's what they did Sky. Dunno about the PvP server but it's disabled in all the battlegrounds.

[Sky]

Oh, if it doesn't affect pve what's the whup? Shouldn't be boxing in pvp imo.

[Numtini]

When I was considering whether or not I had time to pick up an MMO again (I don't, but I'm in anyway), there was a picture someone posted of someone obviously boxing with like a dozen identical characters in lockstep. It obviously wasn't a deal killer, but it was definitely not something that made me say "oh yeah, I want to get back into Rift."

[Jerrith]

Nope doesnt effect me in the slightest. Probably the best solution. But can you honestly say it would have been on your radar at all if it hadn't had threads spammed on the forum to the point of locking?

Is it something I'd been aware of - actually, one of the things I thought about with the F2P change (are we going to see way more multiboxers, now that the cost of entry (an account) is zero?)...  High enough priority to get any action?  Maybe not.

Why not just disable it in pvp instances (including pvp server as an 'instance')? Why also screw the pve boxers?

As Phred pointed out - that is what we did.  Follow is disabled in Warfronts and in Conquest (3 team zone wide PVP).  You are still free to multibox anywhere else (including open world on PVP servers) as much as you want.

(disclaimer: I don't multibox)

I don't multibox on Rift, but I used to (many many years ago) 5 box in EQ.  It's neat, and I'm impressed what some people manage to accomplish when doing it.

[WayAbvPar]

Everquest 2 had alternate functionality for skills in pvp. The tooltips even explained what they did in pvp and pve. So it has been done before. What I don't understand is why Hartsman never pushed for the same functionality in Rift since i am pretty sure that mechanic was his baby in EQ2 at least partially.

Speaking of Hartsman, guess who's back again, but supersized now and wearing a cape :

Scott Hartsman returns to Trion, takes CEO role

Interesting times indeed.

Nothing but good news for Rift and Arche Age, imo.

I am really enjoying my 2nd visit in Telara. A lot of stuff is still overly complicated, but that also makes it sort of interesting, I guess. I know this will never change, but the first RMT store that lists things in USD instead of credits or MS points or golden eagles or gold or whatever will get a shitload of money out of me. Nothing I hate worse than being forced to be chunks of store currency- there is always some remnant left over that isn't enough to buy anything with it. By design, obviously. It is still a shitty thing to do to your customers. If a mount is supposed to cost $5.24, then charge me $5.24, not $7.50 so I can have a mount and ALMOST enough currency left over to buy something useful.

[Stormwaltz]

Trion has also confirmed the closure of its San Diego studio. "We can confirm that the San Diego studio will be closing. The day to day operations of Defiance will be moved to our Redwood City studio where it can be managed alongside Rift and our other in development titles including ArcheAge and End of Nations. As part of this transition, we are working hard to ensure that a number of great people will be making the move from San Diego to the Bay Area and continue their work at Trion," the studio told PC Gamer.

[Jerrith]

I know this will never change, but the first RMT store that lists things in USD instead of credits or MS points or golden eagles or gold or whatever will get a shitload of money out of me. Nothing I hate worse than being forced to be chunks of store currency- there is always some remnant left over that isn't enough to buy anything with it. By design, obviously. It is still a shitty thing to do to your customers. If a mount is supposed to cost $5.24, then charge me $5.24, not $7.50 so I can have a mount and ALMOST enough currency left over to buy something useful.

We try to mitigate at least some of that by providing lots of cheap (1 credit even (less than $0.01)) items you can purchase.  While exact prices work well on high value items, they don't on low value items.  A credit card company charges a flat free plus a percentage on each transaction.  I don't know Trion's rates, but... We couldn't offer a $0.01 item if that transaction was going to cost us $0.15 or more to process.
 

[Sky]

Follow is disabled in Warfronts and in Conquest (3 team zone wide PVP).  You are still free to multibox anywhere else (including open world on PVP servers) as much as you want.

Entirely too sensible a solution. How dare you.


 

[Chockonuts]

Follow is disabled in Warfronts and in Conquest (3 team zone wide PVP).  You are still free to multibox anywhere else (including open world on PVP servers) as much as you want.

Entirely too sensible a solution. How dare you.


 

Today's final smackdown. Entirely sensible reply from Dags. Point awarded to Trion.

Daglar:

I'm sorry that I have not popped in here to give more details or engage in the discussion.

 This change is not a direct result of "just some people complaining on the forums". This issue has been discussed internally since we changed the business model - we've been afraid that the amount of multi-boxing in certain environments would increase due to the fact that there is no longer a barrier to playing the game.

 We've been watching the issue, and it has been on the rise. The number of multi-boxers out there is not astronomically high as some people claim. The number of /in game/ feedback reports on the issue has been steadily on the rise since our conversion.

 I really want to embrace as many play styles as possible for RIFT. I really do. I don't want to turn away players.

 Unfortunately certain play styles combined with specific activities (such as Warfronts), results in a sub-optimal experience for other users. When a single user has the potential - and be clear it is only ever potential - to cause another user to exit the game that simply isn't good for anyone. It isn't good for the multi-boxer, it isn't good for the person being killed by the multi-boxer, and it isn't good for the business.

 I know this decision is polarizing - taking no action was also polarizing. We cannot make everyone happy all the time though we strive to, and we make decisions that we feel are best for the game. I'm deeply sorry that this conflicts with how some of you enjoyed playing the game up until now.

Seriously, Fuck those whinerbabies crying about /follow of all things. And who the Fuck is that "real seebs" community moron @ post 228?

http://forums.riftgame.com/general-discussions/general-discussion/379204-follow-disabled-warfronts-conquest-16.html

I haven't seen that many tears in one post since SWG died.

Scott should immediately send notice down to strip that kind of ridiculousness from having any 'title' whatsoever, and escort them under armed guard to WAR or something.

[Sky]

What, and get rid of the humorous factor? Where's your sense of fun?

Thirteen years into serving the public professionally and I've really developed a special enjoyment of people who go into full freakout mode over trivial stuff. Quite entertaining once you develop the skill set to step back from it and address their complaint rationally.

[Count Nerfedalot]

I'm pretty sure there was a rabid anti-EQ2 contingent on the dev team. There was a lot of anti-EQ2 sentiment I heard during the early alpha when I kept submitting issues with 'this worked in EQ2!' and also plenty of 'because WoW' and so much Vanguard-ism.

And their influence is the single biggest reason why Rift, while successful, came nowhere near what it could have been.  WoW, which those same devs slavishly copied even when it wasn't the best solution or a good fit for their game, succeeded beyond expectations at least partly BECAUSE Blizzard deliberately copied the best practices of their competitors and predecessors.

[Hoax]

Rift wasn't very successful because of things like horrible pvp and no reason for pvp servers to exist. So it didn't fill a pvp niche that was badly unfilled at the time. Their signature feature (the rifts) were a bad joke that got boring after you had been to three of them and that's never a good sign. It also wasn't very successful because not enough people were sick of WoW because they had been playing it for too long yet. Instead everyone sick of WoW was sick of it because it was WoW and Rift just didn't offer anything new beyond the soul system which at launch was good but had a lot of balance issues unsurprisingly.

Beyond the "nope not a pvp game" check and finding out Rifts were really lame what else was there? It was a decently executed but overall samey and bland fantasy MMO with the tiniest hint of steampunk and really stupid factions and a you can be every class system.

[Draegan]

Sky, we were in there together, you know that the alpha was dominated by a shit load of old neckbeards from EQ and VG trying to shit up the game. Hell there are a ton of old EQ players running the joint now.

[Draegan]

Rift wasn't very successful because of things like horrible pvp and no reason for pvp servers to exist. So it didn't fill a pvp niche that was badly unfilled at the time. Their signature feature (the rifts) were a bad joke that got boring after you had been to three of them and that's never a good sign. It also wasn't very successful because not enough people were sick of WoW because they had been playing it for too long yet. Instead everyone sick of WoW was sick of it because it was WoW and Rift just didn't offer anything new beyond the soul system which at launch was good but had a lot of balance issues unsurprisingly.

Beyond the "nope not a pvp game" check and finding out Rifts were really lame what else was there? It was a decently executed but overall samey and bland fantasy MMO with the tiniest hint of steampunk and really stupid factions and a you can be every class system.

Rift was pretty successful, just not game of the year/WOW successful.

[Hoax]

I was more responding to the idea that if Rift had been more like EQ2 it would have not been bland and samey and not doing anything WoW wasn't already doing better. More EQ2 wouldn't have fixed the Rift System and it wouldn't have added pvp and while I know f13 loves mentoring and a host of other little pet QoL features (most of which I agree are quite good) those types things keep people enjoying a game, they don't create buzz and hype and get people to buy it in the first place.

[Draegan]

I have no idea what you're talking about. I don't get your EQ2 reference. What does more EQ2 would of fixed the Rift System mean? Mentoring? Game has that now, and has had it for a while. Doesn't really do much.

[Threash]

Yeah I'm not sure how "more like the game that failed miserably and less like the massive success" is a good idea.  I played EQ2, i can't think of one thing from it that would've made Rift better.

[Nebu]

Rift was a good game that could have been great.  The funny thing, is that I can't really put my finger on exactly why it wasn't sticky.  Solid game.  Decent combat.  Just couldn't hold my interest.  Content could be one issue.  There wasn't enough of it.  The use of spammable macros reducing the play of some classes/builds could be another.  Balance issues and a lack of immersive crafting could be a contributor as well. 

It's a game that I wanted to love, but turned out to only be a fling. Granted, it was a steamy fling.

[Draegan]

Rift was a good game that could have been great.  The funny thing, is that I can't really put my finger on exactly why it wasn't sticky.  Solid game.  Decent combat.  Just couldn't hold my interest.  Content could be one issue.  There wasn't enough of it.  The use of spammable macros reducing the play of some classes/builds could be another.  Balance issues and a lack of immersive crafting could be a contributor as well. 

It's a game that I wanted to love, but turned out to only be a fling. Granted, it was a steamy fling.

The game had plenty of content, imo. The problems were:

1) The took a system about mixing up souls for awesome combo possibilities, and in the end created a cookie cutter build system that left nothing to the imagination. They took all interesting builds and nerfed them because they weren't part of their "vision". They took what could of been an interesting system and made it shallow and super vertical in progression.

2) They were awful at class balance. Not your normal "classes aren't balanced" but they were just plain bad at class design and they were constantly changing and nerfing things because they didn't know what they were doing. I suspect half their developers never played their own game.

3)  The rift system was week. In Beta they showed off their system and it was glorious. Then they nerfed it to the ground. Less frequest, not very rewarding and very tame. They thought people would be annoyed by the Rifts getting in the way of their questing. Boy were they wrong.

4) Combat animations and effects were very basic. When you did a charge skill your feet stayed in place and you just glided to your target. Most fireballs and lightning spells were very small pixal effects that weren't very impressive. Everything kind of looked the same.

There are a few other things but I'll leave it at that. They should put me in a room with developers to make Rift 2.0. Horizontal progression of souls, not vertical. Path of Exile meets Final Fantasy X? XII? style class development with souls. (I.e. imagine if POE's skill board was broken up into pieces and you had to make your own web by putting together your souls). No more quests. all rifts all the time. No raids, open world dungeons, instanced lore-based 3-6 man groups. Instead of making rifts procedural, let them go wild.

I think I'd make a pretty good game.

[Nebu]

I agree with all of that.  Add in the uninspired crafting and that about covers it... oh, and thinking that faction/reputation grinds (a la WoW) were a good idea.

[Hoax]

I have no idea what you're talking about. I don't get your EQ2 reference. What does more EQ2 would of fixed the Rift System mean? Mentoring? Game has that now, and has had it for a while. Doesn't really do much.

I was referring to the post that my post immediately followed.

I'm pretty sure there was a rabid anti-EQ2 contingent on the dev team. There was a lot of anti-EQ2 sentiment I heard during the early alpha when I kept submitting issues with 'this worked in EQ2!' and also plenty of 'because WoW' and so much Vanguard-ism.

And their influence is the single biggest reason why Rift, while successful, came nowhere near what it could have been.  WoW, which those same devs slavishly copied even when it wasn't the best solution or a good fit for their game, succeeded beyond expectations at least partly BECAUSE Blizzard deliberately copied the best practices of their competitors and predecessors.

Perhaps I misread but it seemed to me that Nerfedalot was claiming that more EQ2 would have made Rift reach its full potential or something.

I agree with Draegan's list, in all this time have they improved the soul system or the rifts or the pvp at all?

[Nebu]

I agree with Draegan's list, in all this time have they improved the soul system or the rifts or the pvp at all?

From my limited time in a return to the game: not really, no, and not at all.

[Draegan]

They've progressively made it worse. Work the expansion they increased the vertical progression of the souls which just made everything 60pt builds.

[Pennilenko]

All of the analyzing aside, the real reason why Rift is more turdy than not, is that it considers itself a second job.

[Nebu]

All of the analyzing aside, the real reason why Rift is more turdy than not, is that it considers itself a second job.

I don't get that feel from Rift any more than I did from WoW.  All MMO's require time grinds, but Rift never made me feel like I had to log hours and hours to be competitive.

[Kageru]

It was bland as hell. The soul system mean the classes have no personality, the world feels like something you've seen many times before and the background story and lore is soporific before the tutorial quests are finished.

[Rendakor]

Did they ever fix the mob density issues, particularly on roads? Getting around in Rift was a huge pain because of limited fast travel and aggro mobs roaming all over the roads that would dismount you instantly.

[Numtini]

Did they ever fix the mob density issues, particularly on roads? Getting around in Rift was a huge pain because of limited fast travel and aggro mobs roaming all over the roads that would dismount you instantly.

I have to say, I don't ever remember that happening.

It was terrible in LOTRO though.

[Threash]

Did they ever fix the mob density issues, particularly on roads? Getting around in Rift was a huge pain because of limited fast travel and aggro mobs roaming all over the roads that would dismount you instantly.

This kinda thing is why they had to nerf the rifts.