Friday with Means - September 11th, 2009 - Video Q&A, Sceenies and Info-Nuggets

[Aethyrguard]

Some people are hung up on the old standby of A vs. B.
Adding in variables or alternatives confuses and frightens them.

So what if the scabs are ruining the worker union strike?
Business is business.

There I met my RP quota for this lifetime, I expect overtime for anything further.

It isn't "A vs B". If you knew anything about the Official storyline, Official Factional differences or main Official Storyline characters, this would be obvious to you. Anything you claim neutrals are, there's already a clan for that. Period. Neutrals as "non-participating observers resigned to their peaceful lives tired of the conflict" is the only definition that is not in direct contradiction to everything that the Clans represent. Want to be Mercs? We got them. Want to be Pacifists? We got that covered too. Want to be business men/women/atrox's that trade with both Omni and Clan? Yep you guessed it, there's a clan also for that. But due to the failings of Funcom at some level, or players on some level to pay attention to the lore that already exists for the game. People have become grossly confused on who represents what.

Warmongering clans describes I think 3 of the legacy clans out of the rather long list of Legacy Clans.

[Ayria]

Since you didn't ask that question before now how could I have answered it? Where did I claim clairvoyance?

Why do you insist that the past way of treating Neutrals is the right way?

Try reading before responding then? From someone claiming I didn't read before quoting this is quite funny.

That promise was made after an outrage from players regarding the change.

So basically, to sum this all up into a short concise statement. You want Neutrals to return to how they were because someone who is no longer in power gave you a promise?

[Aethyrguard]

Try reading before responding then? From someone claiming I didn't read before quoting this is quite funny.



So basically, to sum this all up into a short concise statement. You want Neutrals to return to how they were because someone who is no longer in power gave you a promise?

You did not even post the same question. I answered that one twice already even quoted it for you a third time. lol.. read / comprehend / respond.

Since you didn't ask that question before now how could I have answered it? Where did I claim clairvoyance? I have stated not only numerous times in general but particularly in this thread alone why I feel they should return to their TL2 max state. Had you of read my posts instead of hitting the quote button and just beginning to type you would have realized this. Please see below.

Because, I agree with the original purpose of Neutrals? I believe they never should have been allowed to level past TL2? I believe their existence as a side has stepped on the toes of Clan RP/storyline and identity? Because I believe that what has happened since Gaute made the mistakes he made (not the only one) including changing how they are allowed to enter PvP and own towers a blasphemy? has only served to dilute this game on every level? Funcom has since rid themself of him. I only wish it was done sooner.

As for what will happen since I doubt any game director is willing to deal with the crying nonsense that would ensue after such a decision were made to restore AO's integrity utterly, rather keep the boat afloat as long as possible, I am defending the few remaining benefits Sided folk have. We were promised long ago Neutrals would NEVER come anywhere close to Sides. That sides would ALWAYS be the "chosen and Faithful" in terms of RP, PvP and content.

Sadly, since Neutrals have been given the post TL2 treatment that followed, all of those things, RP/Storyline, PvP encounters and Sided Content, have fallen all but to the way side serving only to produce a hollow shell of the game that once was. You can see it in almost every post in these forums from non trolls who come here out of frustration the first time only to be met with sarcasm and cynicism in kind. I am no angel. I make mistakes, post things sometimes I regret later. But I will NEVER regret my stance on this topic regarding Neutrals. I've played this damn game way to long to feel sorry for people who stayed Neutral and beg more and more for sided content for themselves when those who did pick a side rarely see any themselves.

That promise was made after an outrage from players regarding the change.

It isn't "A vs B". If you knew anything about the Official storyline, Official Factional differences or main Official Storyline characters, this would be obvious to you. Anything you claim neutrals are, there's already a clan for that. Period. Neutrals as "non-participating observers resigned to their peaceful lives tired of the conflict" is the only definition that is not in direct contradiction to everything that the Clans represent. Want to be Mercs? We got them. Want to be Pacifists? We got that covered too. Want to be business men/women/atrox's that trade with both Omni and Clan? Yep you guessed it, there's a clan also for that. But due to the failings of Funcom at some level, or players on some level to pay attention to the lore that already exists for the game. People have become grossly confused on who represents what.

Warmongering clans describes I think 3 of the legacy clans out of the rather long list of Legacy Clans.

See those above posts for details! Maybe a fourth time? Furthermore, the way it was "worked" it fit the story, it made sense, it was unique. There are plenty of 3 sided games, and 2 sided games, but very few (AO only?) with a temporary observational side to be allowed to play the game first before making a decision of side. It never should have changed. The story essentially died afterward.

Edit: I'm done feeding you trolls for today on this. I've posted countless facts you weren't even playing AO yet to witness, and, some how feel that because it was before your time it is not important to others who have been playing the game a long time and have not forgotten. Good luck trying to refute anything I posted.

I'll leave you with this one series of questions: What do Neutrals add to enrich the game world, story, pvm, pvp or any other part of AO? What do they now and have they taken away by their continued existence? What problems has their existence created for the developers, content designers and all other departments within Funcom?

Answer me those and maybe I'll consider what you post as something more than just nonsense.

[Ebondevil]

To be honest I have to say I'm inclined to agree with Aethyrguard about the Neutrals, most of them pretty much are either Clans hiding behind a Neutral facade, or Omni toons gaining the benefits of shopping in both Factions player shops...

[Ayria]

You did not even post the same question. I answered that one twice already even quoted it for you a third time. lol.. read / comprehend / respond.

I'm not going to waste my time explaining things to you because I know you're just deliberately twisting things so that you don't have to actually answer.

I'll leave you with this one series of questions: What do Neutrals add to enrich the game world, story, pvm, pvp or any other part of AO?

What do Clan and Omni add to it? The very same thing, diversity that is undefinable. You may as well ask us to define what humans add to the world.

Neutral is a title, a name, a proper noun used to describe a particular grouping of people with no common ties other then personal choice. Do you think that there is some unifying personality trait amongst Clan that undeniably makes them Clan? Or do you think they're normal, ever day human beings just playing under a title?

Neutral adds to this game exactly what you and I add. Behind this mask of (perceived) anonymity that the internet provides we are all just human beings. What we add to the game, to the story to PvM and PvP: is ourselves.

What do they [have] now and have they taken away by their continued existence?

Assuming [have] fits there the answer is nothing. Neutrals take away nothing. If Neutrals weren't in game would you have towers you don't know? Would you have teams you don't have now? Would you have levels, gear, instances, loot, money, and friends that you don't have now?

Neutral isn't taking anything out of the game, they are only adding.

What problems has their existence created for the developers, content designers and all other departments within Funcom?

You.

And other Neutral haters. That's the problems their existence has created. Were you expecting a different answer? Perhaps someone to jump out of the woodwork and shout out that Neutrals have been the bane of developer history by forcing them to create extra content and spend thousands of hours needlessly to balance the game around three instead of two?

Well that person won't be me that's for sure, and I really doubt; baring of course Xaun returning, you'll get much support of that fashion. There are other games out there that have perfectly balanced around three factions.

That AO isn't balanced is more an obvious sign that Funcom has issues balancing, not that having three factions is the reason.

[Aethyrguard]

I'm not going to waste my time explaining things to you because I know you're just deliberately twisting things so that you don't have to actually answer.

Ok took care of dinner now to rip this to shreds proper. You aren't going to waste time.. yeah right. Try you can't find any way to refute it because we all know you well enough that you will never concede a point, never admit defeat and fight till the bitter end of 50+ pages if you can or even remotely feel the possibility that you can. So by stating you aren't going to waste your time followed by a very nice long post is guess what? A nice cop out.

What do Clan and Omni add to it? The very same thing, diversity that is undefinable. You may as well ask us to define what humans add to the world.

Neutral is a title, a name, a proper noun used to describe a particular grouping of people with no common ties other then personal choice. Do you think that there is some unifying personality trait amongst Clan that undeniably makes them Clan? Or do you think they're normal, ever day human beings just playing under a title?

Neutral adds to this game exactly what you and I add. Behind this mask of (perceived) anonymity that the internet provides we are all just human beings. What we add to the game, to the story to PvM and PvP: is ourselves.

Wrong answer. Neutrals add development time to everything. They add more whines to the threads in the forums than sides with 10x the number of players. They add headache to every potential storyline. They add confusion to storylines as well. They add ways to take advantage of attacking your own side without being "omni/clan". Which for some reason is viewed worse than just playing as the other side. As if hiding in a Neutral alt makes things ok.

Assuming [have] fits there the answer is nothing. Neutrals take away nothing. If Neutrals weren't in game would you have towers you don't know? Would you have teams you don't have now? Would you have levels, gear, instances, loot, money, and friends that you don't have now?

Neutral isn't taking anything out of the game, they are only adding.

Wrong again. Neutrals take away core principals that are Clan and attribute them to another faction unjustly. They take players out of the two main sides orgs leaving a more scattered playerbase with smaller orgs than should probably be. They take away consistency. They take away the ability to Funcom on their current budget to really do the job they set out to in making quality meaningful content by adding an entirely different yet identical set of options as Clan already has?

You.

And other Neutral haters. That's the problems their existence has created. Were you expecting a different answer? Perhaps someone to jump out of the woodwork and shout out that Neutrals have been the bane of developer history by forcing them to create extra content and spend thousands of hours needlessly to balance the game around three instead of two?

Well that person won't be me that's for sure, and I really doubt; baring of course Xaun returning, you'll get much support of that fashion. There are other games out there that have perfectly balanced around three factions.

That AO isn't balanced is more an obvious sign that Funcom has issues balancing, not that having three factions is the reason.

Sorry but already have lots of support for this view point. Go ahead and dig around a bit. Even have a post between yours and mine that agrees. I know for a fact you have posted in the "Neutral whine threads", more than once therefore you cannot actually pretend that you don't know that many more people than me disagree with you and agree with me? Or does their position not count because it differs from yours?

Neutrals dilute the game on every level and add nothing to it. If it was actually the preview side it used to be, it would actually "add" something to the game, a use for them.

[Ayria]

Wrong answer.

No surprise there. Nothing is the right answer for you unless it's explicit support. Get over yourself already and realize that just because the answer is not the one you want to hear doesn't mean it's wrong.

Neutrals add development time to everything.

So does Clan! They contribute at least 1/3 of all development time and cost as such I suggest we instantly delete them from the game and alleviate those devs shoulders.

Stop trying to act as if Neutrals are some sub-human culture that is only deserving of the scraps from your dinner table. You are not that important.

[shadowgod]

i think this thread has developed into two factions...

The Traditionalists -- those who want to maintain and respect the storyline of the game.

The JJ Abrams Followers -- those that say, to hell with storyline, lets rewrite it to make more people happy.

[Ayria]

i think this thread has developed into two factions...

The Traditionalists -- those who want to maintain and respect the storyline of the game.

The JJ Abrams Followers -- those that say, to hell with storyline, lets rewrite it to make more people happy.

Well when looking at the long run this game has been running for eight years, the old story is long gone; clinging to it now when the expectations of people have changed is foolish.

[Aethyrguard]

No surprise there. Nothing is the right answer for you unless it's explicit support. Get over yourself already and realize that just because the answer is not the one you want to hear doesn't mean it's wrong.

So does Clan! They contribute at least 1/3 of all development time and cost as such I suggest we instantly delete them from the game and alleviate those devs shoulders.

Stop trying to act as if Neutrals are some sub-human culture that is only deserving of the scraps from your dinner table. You are not that important.

That has to be the most pitiful come back you've ever attempted. Getting old are we? Clan is a founding part of the game, the original two factions and even the main protagonist/antagonist (depending on your point of view omni/clan) in the book, something Neutrals are neither of.

Neutrals aren't subhuman, however they do exactly as I have stated and you have yet to refute or even attempt to. Bad troll is bad troll. Try again please.

[Ayria]

There is nothing to refute.

I know the history of AO, I know that once Neutrals were as you desire them to be again. I am not trying to prove or claim that the past is false.

What we have here is a clash of opinions as shadowgod so aptly pointed out. You want to cling to the old story of eight years hence and revert Neutrals to little more then a limbo state for those undecided; I want the story to continue to adapt to let new players feel welcome.

[Ebondevil]

To be honest I don't mind Neutrals levelling to 220, not too unreasonable, and I'd like for sided people to be able to go Neutral if they wanted to, to fit in with the RP side of things, however, I also think that if a Neutral partakes in PvP they should immediately gain the faction opposite of the person they attacked, or Clan, they broke their neutrality after all.

[Ayria]

To be honest I don't mind Neutrals levelling to 220, not too unreasonable, and I'd like for sided people to be able to go Neutral if they wanted to, to fit in with the RP side of things, however, I also think that if a Neutral partakes in PvP they should immediately gain the faction opposite of the person they attacked, or Clan, they broke their neutrality after all.

See now here's a reasonable suggestion. None of this "Nerf the Neutrals to never level past TL2" crap.

[grumpy-mcfart]

To be honest I don't mind Neutrals levelling to 220, not too unreasonable, and I'd like for sided people to be able to go Neutral if they wanted to, to fit in with the RP side of things, however, I also think that if a Neutral partakes in PvP they should immediately gain the faction opposite of the person they attacked, or Clan, they broke their neutrality after all.

this has always been (more or less) my opinion as well.

[Aethyrguard]

There is nothing to refute.

I know the history of AO, I know that once Neutrals were as you desire them to be again. I am not trying to prove or claim that the past is false.

What we have here is a clash of opinions as shadowgod so aptly pointed out. You want to cling to the old story of eight years hence and revert Neutrals to little more then a limbo state for those undecided; I want the story to continue to adapt to let new players feel welcome.

The very fact that Neutrals embody a view already represented within the Clans is what destroys any possibility of a coherent story. Their very existence was to "Avoid the conflict". By joining the conflict they are no longer neutral, they are Clan if not Omni.

To be honest I don't mind Neutrals levelling to 220, not too unreasonable, and I'd like for sided people to be able to go Neutral if they wanted to, to fit in with the RP side of things, however, I also think that if a Neutral partakes in PvP they should immediately gain the faction opposite of the person they attacked, or Clan, they broke their neutrality after all.

This is something that has also been suggested prior and I support "subfaction'ing". Neutral-Clan Aligned vs Neutral-Omni aligned. Again, I state I am a firm supporter of Neutrals being returned to what they were because what they were served a true purpose. To let a new comer to AO not have to pick a side until they hit the TL2 cap. At which point they'd have to pick a side in the conflict to continue. Since I KNOW this will NEVER happen for obvious reasons, subfaction'ing is the best solution.

[Ayria]

The very fact that Neutrals embody a view already represented within the Clans is what destroys any possibility of a coherent story. Their very existence was to "Avoid the conflict". By joining the conflict they are no longer neutral, they are Clan if not Omni.

Things change, why you cannot accept that I do not know, at time of inception Neutral was to escape conflict, perhaps now they don't want to escape it anymore and just want to fight for their own causes? The storyline of the game can and has to change if it is to stay alive, why does it have to change in a way that reverts to the older ways? Why can't it change to allow equality amongst three factions instead of only two?

Is that such a horrible thing to accept?

[Ebondevil]

Things change, why you cannot accept that I do not know, at time of inception Neutral was to escape conflict, perhaps now they don't want to escape it anymore and just want to fight for their own causes?

Well because that would then make them Clans, not Neutral

Edit: In fact, one could argue that any Neutrals in an Organisation were no longer really Neutral and are really just Clans. I'm not saying things should be taken as far as this but it could be argued that Neutrals who Join an Organisation should stop being Neutral, meaning Neutrals couldn't get Player cities, Tower fields or the like.

[Ayria]

Well because that would then make them Clans, not Neutral

Only so long as people cling to the rigid frame that you use to define people.

Look at it this way. The goal of Neutral is to stop the war, whoever wins, the goal of Clan is to stop the war with them as the winner.

Thus Neutral is not Clan but is still motivated to fight to stop the war.

[Ebondevil]

Look at it this way. The goal of Neutral is to stop the war, whoever wins, the goal of Clan is to stop the war with them as the winner.

Thus Neutral is not Clan but is still motivated to fight to stop the war.

Sorry I don't agree, the Goal of Neutrals is not to partake in the war. The goal of the clans is whatever the individual clan feels like setting.

This is why Neutral Organisations like the Third Faction mess around with the storyline, they're really just clanners, but with a Neutral Tag.

[Ayria]

Sorry I don't agree, the Goal of Neutrals is not to partake in the war.

That is but one definition of Neutral.

"1. not taking part or giving assistance in a dispute or war between others: a neutral nation during World War II. "

But read further into the dictionary:

"2. not aligned with or supporting any side or position in a controversy: The arbitrator was absolutely neutral. "

And you get a definition that allows them to fight so long as they support neither side. This can be done by abstaining from fighting or by fighting each side (ie mercenary)

As I said, you have to get rid of the rigid frame you use to define things.