Cookies Disclaimer

I agree Our site saves small pieces of text information (cookies) on your device in order to authenticate logins, deliver better content and provide statistical analysis. You can adjust your browser settings to prevent our site from using cookies, but doing so will prevent some aspects of the site from functioning properly.

Name changes

Decius
Midnight
Decius
Frankly, if your choice with regard to other players retroactively lose all meaning if the server rolls back 13 months, you didn't meaningfully interact with those players at all.

If we had interactions in World of Warcraft, do you think I should have the right to know your Ark character's name?

I don't, because it's a new game.

I feel the same way about a server wipe. If you think a server wipe is different than changing games, even though it will be a brand new game and probably even marketed as such, then that's a technicality where we can just agree to disagree (like we do on nearly everything else). The only reason they'd wipe is if they think it will get them more players.. thus it stands to reason then that they'll MARKET the wipe.

Did you demand that EQ1 players not be able to use new character names in EQ2?
I don't think players playing those games have meaningful interaction, or if they do they don't use only character names for it.
Decius
Bringslite
Midnight
I don't want the cool kids from landrush (who also directed most/all of the latest settlement captures) voting on anything that affects a player.

Giving each of those individuals the ability to control a settlement is already an awesome amount of power in this game.

I prefer that their authority over a player remain localized and confined to that individual settlement's territory (and thus avoidable by a player).

Those settlement leaders don't need more power.

The ability for cliquishness among like-minded tyrants through diplomacy is also already incredibly high.

If you give settlement leaders (or even company leaders) votes on what an unrelated player can do, you are giving them authority over players that they simply don't deserve, and that players (especially new players) are going to chafe at.

Furthermore, once you set the precedent of giving leaders power over unrelated characters through votes, depending on what new power-through-votes they are later given, you could even be creating a force projection issue.

I actually agree with that and the principle behind that, Midnight.

I also don't think that leaders should have power over their members for things such as name changes. The extent of a leader's power over their citizens should go no further than allowing or disallowing membership, at the most and even that varying according to a settlement's set up.

I agree- the only thing a company or settlement leader should be able to do to any member is to remove them (and the actions that they can take against any character, company, or settlement).

If most of the players dislike a character's name enough to actually do something about it, they can pressure their company and/or settlement to tell them "change your name or be expelled". Or, if the name violates eula, we can use the Customer Service channel.
Midnight
Decius
Midnight
Decius
Frankly, if your choice with regard to other players retroactively lose all meaning if the server rolls back 13 months, you didn't meaningfully interact with those players at all.
I feel the same way about a server wipe. If you think a server wipe is different than changing games, even though it
If we had interactions in World of Warcraft, do you think I should have the right to know your Ark character's name?

I don't, because it's a new game.

will be a brand new game and probably even marketed as such, then that's a technicality where we can just agree to disagree (like we do on nearly everything else). The only reason they'd wipe is if they think it will get them more players.. thus it stands to reason then that they'll MARKET the wipe.

Did you demand that EQ1 players not be able to use new character names in EQ2?
I don't think players playing those games have meaningful interaction, or if they do they don't use only character names for it.
I'm pretty sure those players thought their interactions were meaningful… at least as meaningful as the game allowed. But you have a good point if you're suggesting sandboxes allow far more meaningful interaction.
He who wrestles with us strengthens our nerves and sharpens our skill. Our antagonist is our helper.
-Edmund Burke
Quijenoth
Midnight makes very valid points and with one group controlling 9 settlements its probably a bit too much control. Which is why I went for the points system instead of a for and against voting. If you cam make enough friends you can probably swing to a yes vote with enough support, regardless of how many people choose to stop it. its not perfect and probably could use a lot of testing.

But this isn't about if its right or wrong, meaningful choices or senseless greifing, its about giving the community the power to manage itself, giving it identity and allowing it to govern itself and the people who choose to live in the PFO ecosystem.

Just as we need rules for banditry and rules for alignment, what those things affect are peoples attitudes towards each other, but with no tools to filter those attitudes players end up making assumptions and enforce their own rules. Without defined rules more people get involved with the situation than necessary and this invariably causes conflict that spills outside the game and onto the forums.
Maxen
Tigari
Maxen
A one time name change for all characters on an account that changes hands should be allowed. Beyond that, no.

How do you prove they changed hands, without too much extra work from the Devs?

If NewCo puts considerable resources into finishing the game, adding this feature would simply be part of the effort. But admittedly, proof of change of ownership might be difficult to verify.
arty155jln
Maxen
Tigari
Maxen
A one time name change for all characters on an account that changes hands should be allowed. Beyond that, no.

How do you prove they changed hands, without too much extra work from the Devs?

If NewCo puts considerable resources into finishing the game, adding this feature would simply be part of the effort. But admittedly, proof of change of ownership might be difficult to verify.

This is where NewCo gets a piece of the pie. Make it a fee to change accounts from person to person, and then allow a name change for another nominal fee. It becomes a customer support issue. If someone is selling their account, they set the price, but GW/NewCo brokers the deal, and charges both parties $5 for the service, then if a name change is desired, the new owner of the account can, for an additional $5, do a 1 time name change of all 3 characters on that account.

If I was purchasing a character I would like the chance to change the names. When the player behind the computer changes, we shouldn't hold an in game character name responsible for past deeds.
Caldeathe Baequiannia
arty155jln
This is where NewCo gets a piece of the pie. Make it a fee to change accounts from person to person, and then allow a name change for another nominal fee. It becomes a customer support issue. If someone is selling their account, they set the price, but GW/NewCo brokers the deal, and charges both parties $5 for the service, then if a name change is desired, the new owner of the account can, for an additional $5, do a 1 time name change of all 3 characters on that account.
In which case, why not simply allow a name change for $15.00, since all I have to do is sell the account to myself to accomplish the same thing?
To reach me, email d20rpg@gmail.com
Midnight
Quijenoth
Midnight makes very valid points and with one group controlling 9 settlements its probably a bit too much control. Which is why I went for the points system instead of a for and against voting. If you cam make enough friends you can probably swing to a yes vote with enough support, regardless of how many people choose to stop it. its not perfect and probably could use a lot of testing.

But this isn't about if its right or wrong, meaningful choices or senseless greifing, its about giving the community the power to manage itself, giving it identity and allowing it to govern itself and the people who choose to live in the PFO ecosystem.

Just as we need rules for banditry and rules for alignment, what those things affect are peoples attitudes towards each other, but with no tools to filter those attitudes players end up making assumptions and enforce their own rules. Without defined rules more people get involved with the situation than necessary and this invariably causes conflict that spills outside the game and onto the forums.

1) My guess is MMO players aren't looking for more opportunities to be "managed" by players they have avoided allying with that reside halfway across the map. That's not what I look for when I look for "community".

2) It's not a release valve for conflict outside the game because the POLITICS will spill onto the forums. But now, instead of being able to ignore the Forever War posts because you live in the 75% of the map it doesn't touch, players will have to constantly monitor how other players they've never cared about are suddenly proposing to manage them. The forum wars will be worse because someone's raw ambition to political power can effect ALL players globally, so NO ONE will be able to ignore those forum conflicts. EVERYONE will have to weigh in.
He who wrestles with us strengthens our nerves and sharpens our skill. Our antagonist is our helper.
-Edmund Burke
arty155jln
Caldeathe Baequiannia
arty155jln
This is where NewCo gets a piece of the pie. Make it a fee to change accounts from person to person, and then allow a name change for another nominal fee. It becomes a customer support issue. If someone is selling their account, they set the price, but GW/NewCo brokers the deal, and charges both parties $5 for the service, then if a name change is desired, the new owner of the account can, for an additional $5, do a 1 time name change of all 3 characters on that account.
In which case, why not simply allow a name change for $15.00, since all I have to do is sell the account to myself to accomplish the same thing?
Now this could be an exploit of the system, but such a minor one that I wouldn't care if people sold to themselves.

However the whole reason to get customer support involved, is because they have the real life names behind the accounts. It should be the csr that verifies that the account is actually changing hands. If someone wants to go to so much trouble as to create another "name" with associated credit information for payment, then no system will eventually stop them. These systems are all about keeping the honest person honest.

Currently the population base is so low that most people know each other on the forums. If the game can get another 5k-30k subs then names start to become meaningless. As the game grows, name changes mean less and less, especially when nothing else should change about the character. The reputation, alignment etc. all stay the same.

Names are somewhat meaningless in the game, it's actions that count. What if a player actually has a real life change of heart and changes their play style? Do we then keep the same attitude towards the character in game even though the player at the keyboard has changed their play style?

Does EvE allow name changes? I didn't think they did, and characters are sold there all the time. Actually maybe that's the distinction, it's not the account that is sold, but the character in EvE.
arty155jln
Decius
Would the objections to name changes be resolved if the previous names were still visible, and friend and foe lists updated correctly?
If you look at it through the eyes of coding, every character should have a character ID that is unique, and the name is just an in game identifier. So if the name is changed, the unique ID is still flagged with the same friends/foe lists and is still on all KOS lists.

Changing a name shouldn't change any of the previous relations to in game companies, or alignment. It's one of the big selling points in EvE to get a character with good (or bad sometimes) standing, with the mission givers. Before those characters are sold though, they normally drop from their corporation and it is made public that the character is being sold.
 
You must be logged into an enrolled account to post